



















* / . - • ; *VV'<5? j 












r 




* 




















• • 










. 

* I 
































V 






’ V 



















































I 









“As the hart panteth after the water brooks, 
So panteth my soul after thee, O God.” 




NELSON 

ON 

Christian Baptism 


THE GREAT HERESY 
EXPOSED 





FT. WAYNE, INDIANA 

REV. J. S. NELSON 


AUTHOR AND PUBLISHER 


37 & 


Copyright, 1896 
By J. S. Nelson 
All rights reserved 




DEDICATORY 


And now to “the general assembly and church of the first¬ 
born, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of 
all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, and to Jesus the 
Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, 
that speaketh better things than that of Abel’-’; 

To “Him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his 
own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God”; 

To “them who by patient continuance in well-doing seek 
for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life”; 

To them that “hunger and thirst after righteousness”; 

To “the pure in heart”; 

To “all them also that love his appearing,” 

Is this book dedicated. 


The Author. 




I 

] 

i 

! 




PERSONAL AND HISTORIC 


There may be those who would be interested in knowing 
the processes of mind' and the development of thought by 
which a person bom, reared, and educated in a church which 
defines baptism to be a “sacrament of divine appointment 
wherein by washing with water in the name of the Father, the 
Son, and the Holy Ghost,” etc., and declares that said baptism 
is “necessary to salvation,” was brought to hold and to declare 
said belief and teaching an error sanctioned neither by 
God’s Word nor by the precept or example of either Christ or 
his apostles. To such I would say that the change was by no 
means a thing hurriedly arrived at. On the contrary, twenty 
years witnessed the struggle between old prejudices, as al¬ 
ready referred to, on the one side, and the enlightening power 
of the Divine Spirit, through the Word, on the other. Nor 
was the struggle a marked one in the first years. On the con¬ 
trary, it went on, especially at times, almost imperceptibly. 
Indeed, it might be truly described in the language of Scrip¬ 
ture thus: “Precept upon precept; . . . line upon line; 
here a little, and there a little.” Not until I had finished my 
theological training at Wittenberg and fully entered upon 
the ministry of the word under licensure and ordination of the 
Synod of Northern Indiana of the Evangelical Lutheran 
Church was the question forcibly thrust upon my attention in 
any way to cause what might be called concern. 

Throughout these years of gospel teaching and pastoral care 
and missionary labor, the matter was often presented to my 
mind by the Spirit, as some old familiar text of Scripture bear¬ 
ing upon this subject underwent a complete transformation as 
I gazed upon it either in fact or in memory. I received each 
one with something of gladness, wrapped each carefully up 
in a napkin, so to speak, and laid it carefully away, never 
dreaming that some day the Spirit would, through memory’s 



VI 


PERSONAL AND HISTORIC 


power, cause these mighty truths of God to be resurrected and 
to stand forth, not in their puny individualism, comparatively 
speaking, as in the first instance they came separately to visit 
me, but, on the contrary, in mighty phalanx, as they now thrust 
their giant forms in vast, superior, and irresistible strength 
before my vision, until my attention was riveted upon them, 
and my heart and entire being were permeated by the thought 
of their mighty and sacred truthfulness. 

I seemed impelled, like one of old, to write the things which 
I had seen and heard. I did so, when from out their thou¬ 
sand sepulchers, where I had laid them, they came troop¬ 
ing forth, even as I have said, and with them many giant 
forms not recognized before, which but added strength to their 
array; for each one bore the marks of their nativity, and 
breathed the spirit of the Christ, the Word of God. To them 
I yielded up my soul. They entered in, breaking, as they came, 
the shackles that yet remained of former prejudices, and error, 
and all that bound me to the old thought that anything else 
than the “washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy 
Ghost,” was at all necessary to prepare the soul for “ immortal 
joys,” or to fit the child of God for “everlasting habitations.” 

Having come to this conclusion, nothing remained but to 
resign my charge at Fort Wayne, Indiana, and to prepare 
to promulgate this truth, which I now knew was not given me 
to “hide under a bushel.” I therefore attended the meeting 
of the Synod of the Church held that year (1894) at Columbia 
City, Indiana, and inasmuch as the church at Fort Wayne was 
a mission church under the control of the Boards of the General 
Synod, I tendered my resignation as pastor at Fort Wayne, 
stating my reasons therefor. 

My resignation was accepted, as urged by myself. In fact, 
there was nothing else to do. The Synod of Northern Indiana 
in its session of that year, held but a month or so before my 
resignation, being made aware of my change of mind upon the 
question of baptism, nevertheless unanimously passed the 
following resolution, namely: 

“ Resolved , That we as a Synod express our sincere thanks to 
Bev. J. S. Nelson for his self-sacrificing efforts to build up the 
interests of our Church in the city of Fort Wayne, and we 
heartily recommend him and his cause to the favorable con¬ 
sideration of our people. 

[Signed] “M. L. Smith, Secretary of Synod” 


PERSONAL AND HISTORIC vii 


It is but fair to state that this language is in no way to be 
construed as an endorsement of my position doctrinally. 

Notwithstanding this “favorable consideration” resolution, 
however, the following charge was soon made to the Synod 
through its president. The charge was prepared by Rev. L. A. 
Gotwald, of Wittenberg Theological Seminary, Springfield, 
Ohio, and was signed by himself and others. The exact form 
of the -charge was, “ Circulating fundamental error in doctrine,” 
and the specifications declare: “(1) He teaches that water 
baptism is not enjoined in the Scriptures, while the Lutheran 
Church teaches that it is enjoined. (See Luther’s Smaller 
Catechism, Part IV.) (2) He teaches that water baptism is 
not necessary to salvation, while the Lutheran Church teaches 
'(Augsburg Confession, Article IX.) that it is necessary to sal¬ 
vation.” 

This charge being sent to the president of Synod, Rev. S. P. 
Fryberger, then of Goshen, Indiana, he at once notified me of 
the same, setting the preliminary trial at North Manchester, 
Indiana (Rev. D. A. Kuhn, pastor loci), and calling the South 
District Conference together at said place December 6, 1894. 
Said conference met according to this appointment. There 
were present, besides myself, the following: A. J. Douglas, Col¬ 
umbia City, Indiana; D. A. Kuhn, L. A. Gotwald, Fryberger, 
'Grenoble, West, Kaufman, Francis, Kain, Shaffer, Erick, 
Kelso, Wells. These all voted to defend the doctrinal and 
“fundamental error” of the necessity of water baptism to 
salvation, and to suspend me from the ministry in said Church 
for promulgating the opposite doctrine. Their action is em¬ 
bodied in the following official notice to the Church of my 
suspension: 


“Complaint having been lodged against Rev. J. S. Nelson, 
of Fort Wayne, Indiana, for circulating ‘ fundamental error in 
doctrine,’ a special meeting of the South District Confer¬ 
ence of the Synod of Northern Indiana convened at North 
Manchester on December 6, 1894, to investigate the charge. 
After careful investigation, Conference found him guilty as 
charged and suspended him from all ‘ clerical functions ’ until 
the next meeting of Synod. I hereby announce to the Church 
that the aforesaid Rev. J. S. Nelson, of Fort Wayne, Indiana, 
is so suspended from the performance of any and all ‘ clerical 
functions’ until the next meeting of the Synod of Northern 


Indiana. _ , „ „ , 

[Signed] “S. P. Fryberger, President of Synod. 
“Goshen, Indiana, December 27,1894.” 


Vlll 


PERSONAL AND HISTORIC 


In harmony with the above, the whole matter was brought, 
before the District Synod, which met at Elkhart, October 8, 
1895. The action was upon the report of the committee 
appointed by said Synod to review the action of the special 
conference. This committee reported favorably upon the action 
of said special conference in suspending me from the minis¬ 
try of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, and recommended 
that their action be ratified by the Synod, and that the suspen¬ 
sion be made permanent. The report of the committee was 
adopted without a dissenting voice, the Synod thereby unani¬ 
mously reaffirming their belief in the statement of the “Augs¬ 
burg,” which declares that baptism (interpreted water baptism) 
is necessary to salvation. 

I made no resistance to this action of the Synod, except to 
file a protest, asking that the charge be withdrawn, as will 
appear in the following: 

“Fort Wayne, Indiana, October 1, 1895. 

“To the Synod of Northern Indiana of the Evangelical Lutheran 

Church of the General Synod. 

“Men and Brethren : I herewith greet you in the name 
of our common Master, trusting that his holy benediction may 
rest upon you in all things wherein his glory is reverently- 
sought and the interests of his kingdom maintained and ad¬ 
vanced. 

“I have, after earnest prayer for direction, been led not to 
make any resistance to whatever action your body may see 
proper to take in the matter of my exclusion from the ministry 
of the Lutheran Church upon the charge of ‘circulating funda¬ 
mental error in doctrine.’ 

“I do wish, however, to protest, with all the might of a soul 
quickened by God’s eternal truth, against the unprecedented 
effort to debar a man from the gospel ministry for believing and 
teaching that the old Romish doctrine that water baptism is 
necessary to salvation is a damnable heresy, wholly subversive 
of the truth of God’s holy Word, which declares that ‘not by 
works of righteousness which we have done, but according to 
his mercy he saved us, by the washiug [or baptism] of regen¬ 
eration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; which he shed on us 
abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour,’ etc. (Titus 3:5 
et seq .) 

“I protest against being charged with ‘circulating funda¬ 
mental error’ when I teach, in harmony with God’s Word, 
that ‘by one Spirit are we all baptized’ (I. Cor. 12: 13), and 
that the true definition of baptism, as Paul gives it, is the put¬ 
ting on of Christ ( Gal. 3: 27), and that there is but one baptism 
even as there is but one Lord, and one faith, etc. (Eph. 4: 5.)/ 


PERSONAL AND HISTORIC 


IX 


“I protest, in God’s name, against water baptism being 
foisted upon the world as the baptism which saves, because 
untold millions have, by being lured to put their trust therein, 
been made to miss the great salvation. 

“I protest against being charged with ‘circulating funda¬ 
mental error’ when I assert that Christ never was baptized 
with water himself, or in any way authorized its continuance, 
either by precept or example, but that on the contrary he never 
referred to it except to overthrow it and declare that it was not 
his baptism; and that water baptism being only and always 
significant of previous moral defilement and expressive of a de¬ 
sire to escape therefrom upon the part of the subject thereof, 
therefore the Christ, who was ‘ holy, harmless, undefiled, sepa¬ 
rate from sinners,’ and who ‘ did no sin, neither was guile found 
in his mouth,’ etc., could not have submitted himself thereto. 

“I object to being called a ‘heretic’ for proclaiming to the 
world the glorious fact that we stand complete in Christ, and 
that ‘there is none other name under heaven given among 
men whereby we must be saved,’ and that there are millions in 
heaven to-day who never saw water in any baptismal sense. 

“I therefore ask that the charge be withdrawn, and that I be 
granted a ministerial letter from your body to the United 
Church of Jesus Christ. 

“Yours in the love of the truth, 

“ J. S. Nelson.” 

This earnest protest and appeal was, however, entirely disre¬ 
garded and refused, which action was somewhat mollified by 
the following letters from the two pastorates in which my 
entire ministerial life in the Lutheran Communion was spent: 


“St. Joe, Indiana, October 26, 1895. 

“To All Whom It May Concern: 

“ This is to certify that Rev. J. S. Nelson was for several years 
prior to his.removal to Fort Wayne a good and acceptable min¬ 
ister of the gospel in the Evangelical Lutheran Church of this 
place. We, therefore, the undersigned, officers of said church, 
most heartily recommend him to the Christian fellowship or 
any who bear the name of our common Lord and Master. 
[Signed] “John Leighty, W. C. Patterson, 

“Charles W. Widney, John* Coder, 

“Z. T. Kagey, E. L. Dilley, 

“D. J. Baker, Jacob Sechler, 

“ Officers and Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Churchy 
St. Joe, Indiana .” 

“Fort Wayne, Indiana, October 29, 1895. 


“To All Whom It May Concern: 

“ This is to certify that Rev. J. S. Nelson was for several years 
the accepted and efficient pastor of Christ’s Lutheran Church of 


X 


PERSONAL AND HISTORIC 


this city. We, therefore, the officers of said church, most 
heartily bear testimony to the same and unite in recommend¬ 
ing him to the Christian fellowship of all those who love the 
Lord Jesus Christ. 

“J. H. Keil, 

“J. P. Merillat, 

“H. W. Niswonger, 
“Wm. D. Ruhl, 

“ Officers and Council of Christ's Lutheran Church , Fort Wayne , 

Indiana .” 

In addition to the foregoing I will say, that when I made up 
my mind to take this step I did so in absolute ignorance of the 
fact that there was a mighty army of those who held substan¬ 
tially the same doctrine as did I. The doctrine which I had 
espoused was not whispered in my ear from any source what¬ 
ever other than through the Word of divine truth under the 
enlightening influence of the Spirit, which fulfilled the prom¬ 
ise of Christ to me, namely, “He will lead you into all truth.” 
Llijah-like, I thought I stood alone, and was hence correspond¬ 
ingly glad to find others of “like precious faith.” 

I will here state that I entertain not the slightest malice or ill 
feeling towards any of the brethren in the Lutheran Church 
whose action caused my expulsion therefrom. For old Witten¬ 
berg I shall always cherish the highest regard, and my prayer 
for her professors will ever be that God’s Holy Spirit may lead 
them “into all truth.” 


The Author. 


PREFACE 


If excuse or apology is at all necessary for reopening this 
question which has so disturbed the church of Jesus Christ, 
it must be found in the fact that millions upon millions of 
so-called Christians are surely being led to miss the great salva¬ 
tion by the false teachings of the church itself with reference 
to this question. For it will be conceded that the teaching of 
the church is, and through all the centuries has been, that the 
baptism enjoined in Scripture is that of earthly water, upon 
the proper administration of which salvation is made to 
depend—a doctrine most pernicious, yea, “damnable,” inas¬ 
much as the logical result of such teaching is, that the 
command of God complied with brings salvation, and if water 
baptism is the thing enjoined as that upon which eternal life 
is predicated, then whenever this is received salvation is assured. 
That this is the legitimate deduction from such a premise can¬ 
not truthfully be denied, and hence I say multitudes are going 
down to death through this false teaching of the church, in the 
vain thought that they have fulfilled the command to be bap¬ 
tized, when, in fact, they know nothing about that purity of 
heart and soul which alone is held in Scripture as the fulfill¬ 
ment of the command to be baptized. 

I charge against those who represent the church of Jesus 
Christ in the world, that they have wholly misrepresented the 
Word of God upon this the most vital truth of the gospel, inas¬ 
much as all the interests of mankind are wrapped up in this 
question of baptism, and to be misled here is to be falsely led all 
along the line; for without baptism, true, pure, and genuine, 
there is no possibility of salvation, for “without holiness no man 
shall see the Lord,” and “the pure in heart” alone “shall see 
God,” and baptism is just this—nothing more and nothing less. 
To direct the soul of the anxious inquirer after the way of 
life to any outward ceremony or ordinance as being that 

xi 



Xll 


PREFACE 


referred to in the command to be baptized, is to grievously 
misrepresent God’s truth; and to so hedge up the pathway of 
those who are seeking to escape from the “evils which are in 
the world” as to lead them to miss the great salvation, is cer¬ 
tainly the greatest crime possible. 

But no doubt many will say that they lay no great stress upon 
this ordinance, and that they look upon it as only a “sign of the 
inward grace” already bestowed or desired, and that no person 
is directed to its performance with the thought that salvation is 
made to depend upon it. This is, if possible, more inconsistent 
and blasphemous than the statement that water baptism is 
necessary to salvation, in that it assumes to say of an ordinance 
which, according to their own showing, Christ established and 
enjoined upon his church, that it is wholly unimportant as a 
factor in the plan of salvation. What utter folly is this! If 
earthly water baptism is the baptism referred to by Christ, of 
which he says “ ye must be born,” and that in or with which we 
are to be baptized, then indeed it is by no means unimportant; 
ou the contrary, it is just what so many erroneously declare it 
to be, namely, necessary to salvation. 

Let us imagine, if we can, the mighty spiritual uplift which 
would come to the world if all the ministers of the church, of 
every name, everywhere, would turn away from water baptism, 
and cease to teach or practice it. Suppose the Catholic Church 
would abandon it, with its two hundred millions; and the 
Greek Church, with its one hundred millions, and the Lutheran 
Church, with its fifty millions, and the great Church of Eng¬ 
land, and all the other churches of Protestantism would cease 
to emphasize water, and turn their undivided attention to the 
redemptive work of Christ and to the “baptism of the Holy 
Ghost” through the gospel as the only essentials of salvation, 
until the world should forget that “water baptism” was ever 
taught by the church. What, I ask, would be the result of 
such a course? Would not this old world of ours be speedily 
brought to a saving knowledge of Christ? It certainly would. 
Then, in God’s name, let the church pursue this course, and 
save the world. 

It will be universally conceded not only that any argument 
or practice builded upon a principle fundamentally erroneous 
must of necessity be barren of good results, but that, in addi¬ 
tion, disappointment and ultimate failure will certainly be 
experienced. It matters not whether the “ fundamental error ” 


PREFACE 


Xlll 


be along the line of social ethics, political economy, or theo¬ 
logical dogma, no superstructure reared upon it can have in it 
ultimate blessing, either for the direct promoters thereof or for 
any other person, however remotely related thereto; and in. 
exact proportion as the question at issue involves paramount 
interests, will be the disaster attending its promulgation. That 
baptism is a question involving the eternal life and happiness 
of all men is the plainest truth of God’s Word. What, then, 
the disaster consequent upon a failure to properly apprehend 
that which constitutes its proper fulfillment, and such presen¬ 
tation of it to the great world of humanity as that earth’s 
teeming millions should slowly but surely come to lose sight 
of the real and the true by having their minds continually and 
persistently directed to what is in no sense the thing talked 
about in Scripture as that which is enjoined upon man! That 
this is the exact condition in the world to-day consequent upon 
the mind of mankind being directed to water baptism as that 
which is referred to in Scripture when the word baptize is used 
to express what we must be or do in order to be saved, must 
be patent to any thoughtful observer. 

The whole conception that earthly water is the thing talked 
about, or in any way referred to, or even hinted at in Scripture 
as in any way entering into or in the slightest degree going to 
make up the sum total of that which inheres in the command to 
be baptized, is a grievous “fundamental” and hence “damna¬ 
ble” error. To rectify this mistake, and to overthrow this awful 
error, and to give to the world that which I believe to be the 
truth, of God upon this great and most vital subject, is the ob¬ 
ject of these pages. And if any soul shall arise from the perusal 
thereof with a broader and more true conception of the signifi¬ 
cance of this question and of the high and mighty interests 
involved therein, I shall be amply repaid, and the cause of 
humanity and of truth shall have been served. 

The Author. 

Fort Wayne, Indiana, September 1, 1896. 














































































































































. 











































































































































































CONTENTS 


Personal, and Historic, .v 

Preface, .xi 

Introduction, .xix 


PART I 

PRELIMINARY 

CHAPTER I 
The Argument 

The Origin, History, and General Import of the Word Baptize, Briefly 
Told —A Plain Gospel,.27 

CHAPTER II 

Scripture Representations 

Biblical Representations of Spiritual Conditions Under the Old 
and New Dispensations —Old Testament Baptisms —The Baptism 
of Noah — The Baptism of Naaman the Syrian —The Baptism of 
Nebuchadnezzar,. - 39 


PART II 

THE TESTIMONY OF THE GOSPELS 
CHAPTER III 
John’s Baptism 

The Authority for and the Character of John’s Baptism—The Loca¬ 
tion of Bethabara—The Mode of John’s Baptism—How Did 
Moses Baptize Israel? —The Object of John’s Baptism—John at 
iEnon, -------- .47 

CHAPTER IV 
The Baptism of Christ 

Imperfect Translations—How Christ was Baptized—Prophecies as 
to Christ’s Baptism — Fulfillment of Prophecy—No Record of 
Christ’s Water Baptism —A Model Baptism —Christ Not in the 

xv 









XVI 


CONTENTS 


Water — Evidence for the Water Baptism of Christ but Circum¬ 
stantial— Christ’s Coming Upon the Jordan—Scripture Illustra¬ 
tions of the Use of "EnL — Christ’s Coming Upon the Water Proph¬ 
esied—Israel’s Mighty Leader —“Let the Sea Roar” — A Straight, 
Smooth Highway—Bethabara an Historic Place — How was Christ 
Baptized?—“But John Forbade Him ’’ — Priestly Induction —Two 
Horns to the Dilemma,.77 


CHAPTER V 
Christ’s First Miracle 

Water Baptism Repealed—How the Pharisees Baptized, - - -134 

CHAPTER VI 
Christ Baptizing 

How Christ Baptized —John’s Message to Christ,.142 

CHAPTER VII 
The New Birth 

Baptism and the New Birth Identical—The Baptism of Fire —Heresy 
Hunters—The Golden Rule,.150 

CHAPTER VIII 

Christ and His Disciples Discard Water Baptism 

A Graphic Picture —At Jacob’s Well — Bethesda’s Pool —The Water 
of Life — The Rich Man and Lazarus, ------- ]58 

CHAPTER IX 
The Great Commission 

The Prayer of Christ —The Gospel the Instrument,.167 


PART III 

THE TESTIMONY OF THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 

CHAPTER X 
The Day of Pentecost 

The Disciples Baptized —The Holy Ghost Baptism —The Three Thou¬ 
sand Baptized—The Baptism Enjoined by Peter —An Illustration, 177 

CHAPTER XI 

Post-Pentecostal Baptisms 

The Lame Man Healed—Peter and John Arrested —Peter and John 
Rearrested—The Gospel by Stephen—The Gospel by Philip — 
Christ’s Mission Perpetuated —Simon the Sorcerer, - - - -191 




CONTENTS 


XVII 


CHAPTER XII 
The Eunuch Baptized . 

His Baptism Spiritual in Character,.. 207 

CHAPTER XIII 
Saul of Tarsus Baptized 

The Nature of Saul’s Baptism —The Scope of Paul’s Commission, - 224 

CHAPTER XIV 
The Baptism of Cornelius 

The Gospel to the Gentiles —“What God Hath Cleansed’’—Peter on 
Water Baptism —The Holy Ghost Baptism the Only Baptism — 

Old Customs Abolished — A New Epoch,.233 

CHAPTER XV 

The First Christian Council 

A Pharisaical Claim—An Apostolic Letter—Water Baptism 
Heathen and Judaistic in Origin, . ..267 

CHAPTER XVI 
Other Baptisms 

The Baptism of Lydia —The Philippian Jailor Baptized —Crispus 
Baptized—Apollos at Ephesus —Paul at Ephesus —The Whole 
Counsel of God,.280 


. PART IV . 

THE TESTIMONY OF THE EPISTLES 

CHAPTER XVII 
Buried by Baptism 

Imperfect Translations —Buried, Not in “Water,” but in “Death,” - 295 

CHAPTER XVIII 
Paul’s Mode of Baptism 

The One True Baptism—No Baptism, No Resurrection, - - -312 

CHAPTER XIX 
Putting on Christ 

Putting on Christ the Only Baptism —“One Lord, One Faith, One 
Baptism,” - .322 

CHAPTER XX 

The Baptized Church 

■“The Washing of Water by the Word’’ — Baptism and Circumcision 

Identical —The Fleshly Jew is No Real Jew,.331 

2 






XV111 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER XXI 

Christ the End of the Law 

Scripture Representations,. 

CHAPTER XXII 

The Incorruptible Seed 

The Incorruptible Seed and the New Birth Identical, - 

PART V 

THE TESTIMONY OF REVELATION 

CHAPTER XXIII 

The Fountain of the Water of Life 
Christ the Living Fountain,.- - - 357 

CHAPTER XXIV 

The Alpha and Omega of Inspiration 
Christ the Only Perfect Fountain, 359>' 

CHAPTER XXV 

Let Him Come 

The Anathema of God—The Sin Against the Floly Ghost—A Momen¬ 
tous Question—False Doctrines, ------- - 367" 


- 343‘. 


- 348 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


J. S. Nelson, 


Frontispiece 


Opposite Pago 


Seektng for Jesus,. 

The Flight into Egypt, . 

John Baptizing,.- - - 

View of the Sea of Galilee from Tiberias, - - - - 

The Fords of the Jordan Near Bethabara at Low Water, 

Christ at Cana,. 

Christ Baptizing,. 

Mount of Olives, - - -. 

The Gospel Saves,. 

Launching Out into the Deep,. 

An Angel Visitant,. 

Bethlehem from the Northeast,. 

Paul and Silas in the Philippian Jail,. 

View of Nazareth,. 

Pool of Siloam, Looking Toward Jerusalem, - 


45. 

- 49 
96. 

- 112 
136 

- 142 
168 

- 172. 
177 

- 192 
240' 

- 282 
320 

- 352 




















INTRODUCTION 


It must be conceded by all, even by those optimistically in¬ 
clined, that the results attending religious instruction and the 
ordinary preaching of the gospel are not what we might well 
expect to have realized. When we consider the. great number 
of those who are to-day preaching the word in the church, in 
the Sabbath school, in the young people’s societies, through 
missionary boards and a great number of other organizations, 
until the world resounds with the spoken word and the songs of 
worship and praise, and see that amid all this, or, as we might 
say, in spite of all this, there is a dearth of vital Christianity, it 
makes the heart sick and the spirit sad. This is in strange con¬ 
trast to the power displayed in the first days of the gospel, when 
the Spirit bore them witness, “both with signs and wonders.” 

There must be somewhere that which is an all-sufficient 
reason for this condition of things, which is so foreign to Chris¬ 
tianity. For one, I believe the most potent cause is not the 
prevalent ungodliness of the world, or the innate wickedness 
of the human heart. These are no greater certainly than 
in the days of the apostles, and the mighty Spirit of God, the 
Holy Ghost, made short work of whatever of opposition to the 
truth then manifested itself, even in the hearts of those most 
opposed. Wherein, then, lies the difficulty? Is not the same 
Holy Ghost as prevalent and all-pervasive and as all-powerful 
to save now as then? Certainly. “ Why then is not the health 
of the daughter of my people recovered” in full proportion, as 
compared with the apostolic age ? Suppose that every Chris¬ 
tian minister and teacher in the world to-day were an apostle 
in the same sense as were those who first proclaimed the gospel 
message, actuated by the same motives, as earnest, as zealous, 
as consecrated, as fully “baptized with the Holy Ghost” as 
were they. Would not the world speedily undergo a marvelous 
change? Oh! what a stirring of the “dry bones” the mere 

xix 



XX 


INTRODUCTION 


mention of such a proposition contemplates. Occasionally 
we get a glimpse of the possibilities which lie buried in the 
depths of the gospel of Jesus Christ when the Holy Ghost is 
invoked, and the grace of God not frustrated, as we see, per¬ 
haps once in a century, or possibly once in a generation, one t 
who presents the characteristics of an apostle of the olden 
time, and instinctively we think of a Luther, of a Wickliffe, a 
Wesley, an Edwards, or a Moody, and we wonder what would 
be the result upon the world if all Christian ministers were 
similarly endowed; for we recognize that their power lies not 
with themselves, or in anything they have or are, but in being 
God-crowned and “full of the Holy Ghost.” 

I purpose to show in these pages, God helping me, that the 
present conditions exist because the church has left the “sim¬ 
plicity of the gospel,” which alone is the “power of God unto 
salvation” when accompanied by the Holy Ghost, and has 
turned aside to follow vain delusions and the traditions of 
men, “after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ,” 
in whom “dwclleth all the fullness of the Godhead.” It has 
been in vain that the church has thus taught “ for doctrines 
the commandments of men,” even as said the Christ, turning 
aside from the commandments of God that she might keep her 
own traditions, prominent among which is “water baptism,” 
which to-day is, with no authority save that of human tradi¬ 
tion, the universal practice of the church, thereby (as might 
well be expected) causing more evil speaking, wrangling, con¬ 
tention, and division than perhaps any or all other questions 
combined, and certainly presenting, and building up, and per¬ 
petuating an everlasting, insurmountable barrier to the peace 
of Zion, and the ultimate union of the church of Jesus Christ,— 
yea, more, in the emphasis of which multitudes of the race, 
by having their attention thus drawn to and centered upon 
“water baptism” as the thing talked about and enjoined in 
Scripture, and upon the proper observance of which eternal life 
is predicated, and without which salvation is impossible, are be¬ 
ing led to embrace it as a matter of divine appointment, and 
hence that upon which they may safely rest their hopes of eternal 
salvation; for is it not true, even as they are taught, that “he 
that believeth and is baptized shall be saved”? And if water 
baptism is the thing talked about, then, indeed, they have all 
the assurance necessary (namely, the word of Christ) upon 
which to base their belief. 


INTRODUCTION 


XXI 


That at least one-half of the so-called Christian world is rest¬ 
ing its hope of salvation upon the outward performance of the 
rite of baptism, is what I fully believe. Who is responsible for 
this condition of things ? The church, and the religious teachers 
thereof. It is the false teachings of the church which are thus 
side-tracking the souls of men, and causing them to miss the 
great salvation, and that, too, by attributing to an outward 
ordinance, repudiated by both Christ and his apostles, saving 
properties, thus setting it in the room and place of the grace of 
God, and causing it to usurp the attributes, work, and office of 
the Holy Spirit. 

Is it any wonder, since the grace of God is thus frustrated 
and the Holy Spirit is thus quenched, and Christ, who is the 
“ fullness of the Godhead,” is deemed as not sufficient, and it is 
thought that these must be reinforced by an earthly element and 
ordinance to which men may look as of more worth than all 
the purifying grace of God, and more potent in the matter of 
the salvation of the soul than the “baptism of the Holy Ghost,” 
of whom, as to any personal heart experience they are as sub¬ 
limely ignorant as were those twelve persons whom Paul found 
at Ephesus, who declared that they had “not so much as heard 
whether there be any Holy Ghost,”— is it any wonder, in view of 
these things, I repeat, that the “health of the daughter of my 
people” is not “recovered” ? and that, too, because the hearts as 
well as the harps of Zion still “ hang ” by the “ rivers of Babylon ” 
instead of swelling the notes of praises to the King in his 
palace. 

Ought we not rather to expect just this result in view of the 
declarations of Scripture, out of the mouth of both Christ and 
his apostles, namely, “ The flesh profiteth nothing: the w r ords 
that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life ” ? And 
again, Paul deals a masterly death-stroke to ritualistic observance 
in II. Corinthians 3:6: “Who also hath made us able ministers 
of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the 
letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. . . . For if that which 
is done away was glorious [ namely, the old ritualistic ceremo¬ 
nial law, with all its types and shadows], much more that which 
remaineth is glorious. . . . Now the Lord is that Spirit [that 
is, the thing here talked about as that which giveth life, and 
which is here denominated glorious ]: and where the Spirit of 
the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with open face behold¬ 
ing as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the 


XXII 


INTRODUCTION 


same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the 
Lord.” Romans 7: 4-6: Being “dead to the law by the body of 
Christ,” and being delivered therefrom, “that we should serve 
in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.” 

These, with innumerable other passages, but point out the 
danger inhering in the old law of carnal commandments and 
ordinances which this same apostle declares were against us, 
and which he says Christ took “out of the way, nailing them to 
his cross,” abolishing them in it, or in his death. 

That all of the disaster and death so apparent in the so-called 
Christian churches are the result of our disregard of these warn¬ 
ings of Scripture, is true. Has not the church most bitterly 
experienced the truth that the “letter” of the law (namely, 
the outward ritualistic ceremonies and ordinances) “killeth”? 
It certainly has. One glance at the churches of ritualistic ten¬ 
dencies is sufficient to prove it. Where is the spiritual life of 
the Greek Church, the Catholic Church, the Church of Eng¬ 
land, or of the old German Lutheran Church, or of some other 
churches that might be named which have persistently thrust 
certain ordinances before their followers, saying, virtually, 
“ These be thy gods, O Israel ” ? Oh, yes, the letter of the law 
does kill. It is only the spirit that giveth life. 

In Judges 7:1-8 we have God’s estimate of those who turn 
away from him to the idolatrous worship of the water-god. Of 
the thirty-two thousand men who composed Gideon’s army 
in the first instance, twenty-two thousand declared themselves 
unwilling to engage in the service of the Lord in fighting 
against the Midianites. They were idolaters and cared noth¬ 
ing for the honor of the God of Abraham. Of the ten 
thousand that remained nine thousand seven hundred w r ere 
hypocrites, and while declaring their superior fidelity pub¬ 
licly, in their hearts were as really worshipers of the gods 
of the heathen as were the others who had refused to serve. 
But now mark the wisdom of God’s methods: “Bring them 
down unto the water, and I will try them for thee there.” 
These people little knew that they were being made to declare 
their idolatry in the sight of Gideon. They were, as I have 
said, worshipers of the false gods of the heathen. Among 
these the water-god held a conspicuous place. No heathen 
worshiper of the water-god would dare to presume to drink of 
any stream held to be sacred without approaching it in the atti¬ 
tude of worship; hence the bowing down upon the knee of 


INTRODUCTION 


xxiii 

all but the three hundred loyal and true-hearted worshipers 
of the living God. Their hypocritical mask was here thus 
fully removed, and their true character revealed, while the 
three hundred in their very manner of drinking revealed with 
equal clearness that they had no thought of worship in their 
hearts toward the water as a god, but on the contrary, they 
showed their utter disregard thereof in their very action. 

The lesson in all of this for us of the present day is manifest, 
namely, that God cannot, neither does he, use the idolatrous 
worshipers of water to advance the interests of his kingdom 
or to overthrow error. This is as manifest to-day as in the 
olden time. Neither the individual nor the church which puts 
its trust in water, or which bows the knee thereto, thus giving 
to it the honor and ascribing to it the power and efficiency 
belonging only to Christ and the Holy Spirit, can for a single 
moment be anything but a hypocritical pretender, and must of 
necessity be but a source of weakness in the army of the Lord, 
and hence will be “turned back” and find its rightful place 
among the opposers of the church of the living God. 


. 






V 



















■ 




. 











































' 

- 







































































































I ■ 






•*r. 








, 























































































































































































































































































PART I 

PRELIMINARY 

























































. . . 





































































































* 































































































PART I 

PRELIMINARY 


CHAPTER I 
THE ARGUMENT 

It will readily be admitted that this question of 
baptism has been discussed more with a view to 
determine the proper mode of water administration 
than to determine whether or not it is an ordi¬ 
nance perpetuated under the Christian dispensation 
by the authority of Christ or his apostles. This 
latter phase of the question does not seem ever to have 
been seriously considered. The whole Christian world, 
with few exceptions, for centuries has without question 
received, held, and taught that water baptism is that 
which is referred to in Scripture, when baptism is the 
subject discussed. That this is an entire misapprehen¬ 
sion of the truth of God upon this subject, we fully 
expect to prove to the satisfaction of all except those 
who have become so blinded by prejudice and bigotry 
as to render them unable to see the truth. 

The reason why men have.not before discovered this 
truth is because they have always believed baptism to 
refer to an outward ordinance in the church, of divine 
appointment, in and through which certain benefits 
were to be received, and they never thought that to be 

27 


28 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


baptized meant a condition of heart, synonymous with 
purity, holiness, sanctification, etc. But inasmuch as 
Scripture teaches this, we must at once acknowledge that 
this condition cannot be attained save by the purifying 
grace of God, which is not confined to, limited by, 
of in any way made to depend upon anything in the 
human subject except true repentance, faith, and glad¬ 
ness of reception of the word of divine truth. For as a. 
baptized condition is that which is wrought out in and 
for man, it cannot be true that man, being the subject 
of the operation, can at the same time be the active 
operator ; and while it is true that “ he that sanctifieth 
and they who are sanctified are all of one,” it is also- 
true that it is “ God which worketh in you both to will 
and to do of his good pleasure.” 

THE ORIGIN, HISTORY, AND GENERAL IMPORT OF THE; 

WORD “BAPTIZE,” BRIEFLY TOLD. 

In seeking to determine the truth with reference to 
the scope and general significance of the word baptize ,, 
there are many fields open which might with profit bo 
examined and made to yield up their store of informa¬ 
tion pro and con upon this subject. This ground,, 
however, has been gone over so thoroughly and per¬ 
sistently by others (and yet those who have made 
these examinations have each, presumedly, honestly 
differed as to the import of the information thus 
gained) that I have concluded not to go outside of the 
Scripture narrative itself in treating the subject, except, 
to say that all authorities agree on the following 
propositions, namely: 

Neither the word nor that for which it stands is of 


THE ARGUMENT 


29 


modern or Christian origin. On the contrary, ftaxztZa) 
is a word of purely Greek origin, and in so far as the 
term denotes a religious rite or ceremony it was in use 
long ages prior to the introduction of Christianity, 
both as a Jewish and also as a heathen mode of religious 
or ceremonial purification. Indeed, while the word 
unquestionably means to dip, immerse, dye, stain, 
color, tinge, wet, etc., it is also the equivalent of every 
word in every language which means to wash, purge, 
cleanse, purify, sanctify, or make holy. It also signi¬ 
fies, and in some one of its numerous forms properly 
translates, any word in any language which is used to 
designate an overmastering power or influence which 
lays hold of a person or object, converting or trans¬ 
forming the same in purpose, character, or nature, and 
which power or influence so thoroughly pervades 
and controls the person or object as to superinduce 
conditions and characteristics in harmony with itself, 
and thus lead on to an ultimate destiny otherwise im¬ 
possible. 

It will at once be seen that this last definition infin¬ 
itely wfidens the scope and meaning of the word baptize. 
We hence find in the classics, and in many of the 
writers of antiquity, as also in many of the early 
Christian writers, references to baptisms by robbery, 
gluttony, drunkenness, evil passions, etc., as well as 
by repentance, confession, righteous desires, etc. In 
modern times it may be said that the somnambulistic, 
hypnotic, mesmeric, spiritualistic, electric, or other dom¬ 
inant influences exerted by one upon another so as to 
bring him fully under the power thereof may be truth¬ 
fully termed baptise. This will serve to explain why 


30 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


this word has been chosen by God to designate 

that all-controlling influence in human affairs exercised 
by himself through the mighty operations of the Holy 
Ghost through the gospel. This will be fully apparent 
whether we view the mighty moving of the Spirit of 
God upon the “face of the waters” in the very “begin¬ 
ning,” which all authorities recognize as being a baptism, 
or the experience of Noah, or that of Moses at the Red 
Sea, or that of Joshua at the Jordan, or the more 
modern baptism of the hosts of Israel under the mighty, 
all-pervasive influence of John the Baptist, which 
influence is designated thus: “And were baptized” 
“ oTt aurou ” (under his influence), etc. 

In distinctively Christian , baptism the subject is 
represented as being under the control and influence 
of the mighty Spirit of God. All the prophets and 
holy men of the olden time spoke and wrote, it is said, 
under the overmastering power and inspiration of the 
Holy Ghost, with which they were filled. John the 
Baptist was under this same all-controlling influence— 
“filled with the Holy Ghost.” This was that also' 
which controlled and governed every word and act of 
the Christ, and which constituted the baptism where¬ 
with he was baptized. It was also under the mighty 
inspiring influence or baptism of this same Holy Spirit 
that the disciples went out to baptize or purify the 
nations through the preaching of the gospel of Jesus. 
Christ, and it was under the same mighty influence of 
the Holy Ghost exerted through them that the multi¬ 
tudes were acted upon, which is everywhere called the 
“baptism of the Holy Ghost.” Indeed, we shall see 
that nothing else than this constitutes Christian baptism.. 


THE ARGUMENT 


31 


When God, therefore, wishes to choose a word out of 
human language which will be expressive of his entire 
work upon the human heart and soul, from first to 
last, from beginning to end, from “alpha to omega,” 
he selects this one word pax t&id, with its mighty com¬ 
prehensiveness of significance, and uses it as including 
the entire work of his Holy Spirit through the gospel 
upon the heart of man from the very first contact 
therewith through the word of divine truth, opening 
the eyes of our “spiritual understanding,” “unstopping 
the deaf ears,” convicting the soul of the sinner, induc¬ 
ing faith, repentance, prayer, justification, sanctification, 
redemption, glorification, salvation, yea, passing the 
soul through the “gates of day” and presenting it 
before the throne of the Father with “exceeding joy,” 
without “ spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing,” made fully 
in the likeness of God as it is in Christ Jesus our Lord, 
“into the fullness of the measure of the stature of 
Christ.” All of this, yea, infinitely more than has ever 
“entered into the heart of man” to conceive, is wrap¬ 
ped up in and is signified by this one word paxrfca). 
How infinitely, then, do we belittle and circumscribe 
its significance when we teach that the whole scope 
and meaning of the word are fulfilled in water bap¬ 
tism. Nothing could be more destructive of spiritual 
truth than such an apprehension and teaching, and the 
world is the loser thereby to an extent that God only 
knows. “Beware of false teachers.” 

A PLAIN GOSPEL. 

In discussing this question, it will certainly be wise 
to listen to God’s own statement as to the clearness and 


32 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


definiteness with which the gospel message and all 
that pertains to salvation are set forth and declared. 
In harmony with this thought we will quote Isaiah 
35 : 5-8 : “ Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, 
and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped : then 
shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of 
the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters 
break out, and streams in the desert. And the parched 
ground shall become a pool, and the thirsty land 
springs of water. . . . And an highway shall be there, 
and a way, and it shall be called The way of holiness; 
the unclean [unbaptized, or unregenerate, or impure, or 
unholy, or unsanctified] shall not pass over it; but it 
shall be for those : the wayfaring men, though fools, 
shall not err therein .” In this latter clause we have a 
statement from God’s Word so forceful, clear, and 
convincing that it may well challenge our thoughtful 
attention. Here the way of salvation is declared to be 
set forth so plainly that the “ wayfaring men, though 
fools, shall not err therein.” “Fool,” according to the 
Scripture interpretation of the term, does not refer to 
the idiot, the man wdthout intelligence, but to the 
person who has denied or rejected, or who has not fallen 
in with, God’s gracious purpose as expressed with 
reference to man, namely, “Let us make man in our 
image.” It is to such that the gospel message comes ; 
for it must be remembered that all men are fools in 
the first instance and until enlightened by the truth of 
God as it is revealed in the person and gospel of Jesus 
Christ. 

If, then, the gospel reveals to man a way of salva¬ 
tion so plain that no man shall err therein, or fail to 


THE ARGUMENT 


33 


find the way to eternal life, then anything which man 
sets up as being “necessary” thereto which is dark 
and not easily perceived, and which is not and 
cannot be easily verified as the truth of God, cannot 
of necessity be a part of or an important factor in the 
matter of salvation. In other words, all the essentials 
of Christianity must be easily understood by man 
even in his foolish or wicked state, and be so presented 
to him in the gospel message under the manipulating 
hand of the Holy Spirit as to make a failure on the 
part of any honest person to find that way an impos¬ 
sibility. That this principle thus enunciated by God 
himself forever precludes the thought that water bap¬ 
tism has aught to do with, or that it now holds an 
important place in, the plan or purpose of God, or that 
it is anywhere the thing talked about as being that 
upon which eternal life is predicated, cannot but be 
admitted by every honest reasoner; for it must be 
conceded, not only that the “fools” (the wicked men) 
are all in the dark and at sea with reference to this 
question, but that it is- equally true that thousands 
upon thousands of the most intelligent and godly 
among men have utterly failed to see “eye to eye” in 
this matter, proving at once, as I have said, that water 
baptism is not among the things held by God as 
being important, inasmuch as it is here declared that 
all matters pertaining to salvation are set forth in such 
abundant clearness that even wicked persons under¬ 
stand them almost intuitively and as surely as do 
Christians. The wicked know that there is a God, a 
revelation, a gospel, a Christ, a Holy Spirit, They know 
that they are impure, unclean, and stand in need of 

3 


34 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


purification. They will all acknowledge these things 
as well as do Christians. They also understand the 
things necessary, namely, repentance, faith, cleansing 
through the gospel, baptism of the Holy Ghost, etc. 
In all of these things there is no division, or differ¬ 
ence, or misconception, showing at once that these are 
essentials, because of the plainness with w^hich they 
are set forth, and the readiness with which the human 
mind apprehends and believes them. But when we 
strike the question of water baptism, at once we are in 
a foaming sea of divergent currents, and men find them¬ 
selves driven hither and thither without chart or com¬ 
pass, and the ship of Zion is torn and rent by the 
angry breakers, until there is very great danger of be¬ 
ing completely submerged—immersed, indeed—in 
these angry waters of contention and dispute, in the 
swirl and whirl of which many, very many, are 
making shipwreck of their faith. Is this an over¬ 
drawn picture ? No; by all experience, no; and 
volumes might be written illustrative of its truthful¬ 
ness. 

That all this difficulty is upon us because we have 
altogether failed to rightly interpret God’s truth upon 
this subject, is manifest. Like the Israelites of old, we 
also are and have been “teaching for doctrines the 
commandments of men,” and the result is as we see it. 

This, like every other question, however, ought to 
stand or fall according as it will or will not stand the 
test of God’s Word. “To the law,” then, “and to the 
testimony.” 

That water baptism was enjoined and universally 
practiced under the Jewish ceremonial law, will be 


THE ARGUMENT 


35 


clearly proved. Indeed, we have only to understand 
that all the numerous washings and purifications in or 
with water commanded by the old law were nothing 
more or less than baptisms (and that the Scriptures 
so declare) in order to realize the very large place 
which water baptism held under the old dispensation. 
This being proved, as it will be, the only other question 
to be determined is, Were these water baptisms, so 
universally observed and practiced by the Jews, per¬ 
petuated under the Christian dispensation by the 
authority of Christ and his apostles, and is the 
baptism so persistently urged upon man under the 
gospel one and the same with those of the olden times? 
We purpose showing not only that these were not 
perpetuated by authority, but that, on the contrary, 
they were most positively annulled and repealed. 

I submit that it is but reasonable to demand that 
when a word in the original which is about to be 
interpreted has more than one meaning or legitimate 
interpretation it should be interpreted by that word 
in the English which most truthfully sets forth the 
thought, motive, purpose, or action sought to be re¬ 
vealed, and which will the most readily harmonize 
with that which is the known experience of those who 
are the subjects of the operation. 

If, then, purging , cleansing , purification , washing , sanc¬ 
tification , holiness , and other kindred words are used 
by God to set forth the character of the work performed 
by him upon the human soul, and as being synony¬ 
mous with the “ washing of regeneration and renewing 
of the Holy Ghost” ; and if these terms properly rep¬ 
resent the experience of the human soul as it passes 


36 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


through or under the mighty manipulating hand of 
the Holy Ghost; and if this Greek word paxTiZw, which 
the Holy Ghost uses to set forth that which man must 
be and do in order to be saved, is capable of being 
legitimately and honestly interpreted so as to include 
all this, then why must we discard this signification of 
the word in our translation of the same, and restrict 
ourselves to the lowest possible idea involved in the 
term, and thereby misrepresent Scripture and thwart 
the Holy Ghost by interpreting the word ftanriZa) to 
mean dip, sprinkle , or pour , which words, although they 
may sometimes be used as proper and legitimate 
renderings of this term, yet by no possibility can 
truthfully set forth, or in any way reveal, or even 
indicate or suggest to the mind, the wish or purpose 
of God in us, or give us to properly understand that 
which must be a living experience in ourselves in 
order to fulfill that which is involved in the command 
to be baptized? 

If all this were different, and if the Greek word 
PaxTiZa) were nowhere known to have the signification 
of purify, or cleanse, or any of the meanings referred 
to ; and if, further, the Scriptures nowhere enforced the 
idea of soul purity as a prerequisite to eternal life ; 
and if the human heart were a total stranger to all 
this work of grace as wrought out upon and for it by 
the Holy Spirit of God through the gospel; and if the 
Greek word were never used by God to signify 

that which must be accomplished in and for man ere 
he can become a partaker with the “ saints in light,” 
then, indeed, there might be some excuse for our fail¬ 
ure to interpret God’s Word in such a way that the 


THE ARGUMENT 


37 


high and holy truth inhering in baptism should be 
clear to the human mind. But when we know that 
the word ftanTiZw, fairly and legitimately rendered, 
means just that which God everywhere sets forth as 
being necessary ; and when, by every utterance of his, 
most thorough and radical soul purification is insisted 
upon; and when the purpose of God is revealed to be 
man’s ultimate and complete moral renovation, then, 
indeed, we believe ourselves to be entirely justified in 
holding that the thing which God purposes, and that 
which is the universal Christian experience, namely, 
the baptism of the Holy Ghost, must be the baptism to 
which Scripture alludes when it says, “Ye must be 
born again” or baptized , and that hence we are more 
than justified in seeking with all our power to over¬ 
throw the great “fundamental error” of those who teach 
that baptism refers.to an outward ordinance in which 
earthly water is a necessary element and a factor upon 
which eternal life is predicated and without which sal¬ 
vation is impossible. And especially so when by 
limiting the meaning of the term to the simple ideas 
of dipping , plunging , sprinkling , or pouring , or to any 
other form or mode of water administration, we can 
by no means direct the soul to God or-to the necessity 
of holiness of heart and life. It is simply impossible 
to do so with these forms, because neither in Scripture 
nor elsewhere are these words used to set forth an action 
of that character. The words dip , plunge , immerse ,, 
sprinkle , or pour can never be used to direct the soul to 
God, or to the idea of soul purity. 

Is it possible for us to believe that, when God is 
seeking by every means to convey to our minds the 


38 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


fact that we are impure and stand in need of moral 
renovation, and when he uses the term baptize to 
express that which we must do in order to be saved, 
he discards this high significance of the term, 
and that he means nothing more after all than that 
we should come and be dipped , or sprinkled , or poured 
in or with water? Is not such a thought worse than 
silly or ridiculous? Is it not in the fullest sense 
wicked ? And yet, if earthly water is at all the thing 
signified in the gospel command to be baptized, then 
this representation is the only correct one. 


CHAPTER II 

SCRIPTURE REPRESENTATIONS 

BIBLICAL REPRESENTATIONS OF SPIRITUAL CONDITIONS 
UNDER THE OLD AND NEW DISPENSATIONS. 

Psalm 42 : 1: “As the heart panteth after the water 
brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, 0 God. My 
soul thirsteth for God, for the living God.” Psalm 
63 : 1 : “My soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh longeth 
for thee in a dry and thirsty land, where no water is.” 

This longing, this thirst, is to be abundantly satisfied. 
Isaiah 44 : 3 : “I will pour water upon him that is 
thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground : I will pour 
my Spirit upon thy seed.” Isaiah 43 : 18-20 : “Re¬ 
member ye [therefore] not the former things, neither 
consider the things of old,” for “I will even make a 
way in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert . . ., 
to give drink to my people.” Isaiah 35 : 6, 7 : “In the 
wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the 
desert. And the parched ground shall become a pool, 
and the thirsty land springs of water.” “The wilder¬ 
ness and the solitary place shall be glad for them,” for 
“they shall see the glory of the Lord, and the excel¬ 
lency of our God” (namely, Christ Jesus, the living 
water) ; therefore, “strengthen ye the weak hands, and 
confirm the feeble knees [made so through the drought 
from which they were suffering]. Say to them that 
are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, your 

39 


40 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


God [the living water for which humanity has ever 
thirsted ] will come . . .; he will come and save you,” 
etc. Zechariah 13 : 1: “ In that day there shall be a 
fountain opened to the house of David, and to the 
inhabitants of' Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness.” 
“ And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall 
go out from Jerusalem.” “And all the rivers of Judah 
shall flow with waters.” Revelation 22 : 1 : “And he 
showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as 
crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of 
the Lamb.” “Unto you, O men, I call; and my voice 
is to the sons of man.” “ Ho, every one that thirsteth, 
come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money ; 
come ye,” etc. “ In the last day, that great day of the 
feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, 
let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth 
on me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly shall 
flow rivers of living water.” For “the water that I 
shall give him shall be in him a well of water spring¬ 
ing up into everlasting life.” “The Spirit and the 
bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. 
And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever 
will, let him take the water of life freely.” 

Who can read all of this and yet believe that the 
water of which we must be born, and into which we 
must be baptized, and which is everywhere urged upon 
mankind, and without which there is no salvation, 
refers to earthly water? Is it possible to believe that it 
is earthly water that is here being talked about? Is 
not such a thought the height of blasphemy ? We 
fully believe that it is, and we expect to fully prove 
our position. 


SCRIPTURE REPRESENTATIONS 


41 


OLD TESTAMENT BAPTISMS. 

The Baptism of Noah. 

While no doubt there were earlier baptisms, yet the 
first one recorded or spoken of as such is that of Noah 
and his family. We never should have known that 
this was held as being a baptism, were it not that Peter 
refers to it as such. (I. Pet. 3 : 21.) In his reference 
thereto he styles that baptism a “figure” (as were all 
the baptisms of the olden time) of the baptism which 
now saves us (“not the putting away of the filth of the 
flesh, hut the answer [or response] of a good conscience 
toward God”). That Noah was saved from the flood 
by being in the ark, is true. That the ark is here a 
figure of the salvation wrought out for humanity by 
Christ Jesus, into whom we must come through bap¬ 
tism, thus securing to us safety, is also true. Humanity 
was saved from the water then by the ark, which was 
a type of Christ. Humanity is saved to-day by Christ 
himself, who is the Ark of the “new covenant.” As 
the one ark was typical of another, so was that flood 
typical of the flood of “everlasting destruction from 
the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his 
power,” from which destruction baptism into Christ 
saves us. 

The Baptism of Naaman the Syrian. 

The next case especially referred to in the Greek 
translation from the Hebrew is that of Naaman the 
Syrian. It is recorded in the fifth chapter of II. Kings, 
and sets forth the fact that Naaman came to Elisha in 
order to be healed of his leprosy. Elisha directed him 
to go and wash seven times in the river Jordan. The 


42 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


Greek word which is here translated wash is XoTxrcu , 
which means to wash, whether as a religious purifica¬ 
tion or otherwise, although the word is no doubt used 
in this instance to denote a religious purification. Now, 
Naaman may have dipped himself in the Jordan, if he 
chose to do so; but if he did, he was not commanded 
to do so, inasmuch as this word Xobaai never means to 
dip or to immerse, and is frequently used to describe 
occurrences where immersion is out of the question. 
Naaman was commanded to go and wash ( Xobeat ). 
He no doubt did that which he was directed to do, in¬ 
asmuch as he received that for which he came, namely, 
he was healed of his leprosy. 

The word, however, which describes that which 
Naaman did is this word in one of its forms, of 

which we are speaking, which word, as we have said, 
is never used in Scripture except to denote either an 
act of religious purification on the part of the individ¬ 
ual or a company of people, or to set forth some 
especial act of God. The word, therefore, very prop¬ 
erly describes that wondrous healing which was the 
result of Naaman’s effort to obey God. He was healed 
of his leprosy, baptized , cleansed. 

The Baptism of Nebuchadnezzar. 

Nebuchadnezzar the king also is said to have been 
baptized with the “dew of heaven,” as recorded in 
Daniel. A careful study of this passage reveals the 
fact that this king became proud, haughty, high- 
minded, and decreed himself a god. For this he was 
chastised by God until he should come to know that 
the “Most High ruleth,” etc. We do not know the full 


SCRIPTURE REPRESENTATIONS 


43 


nature of Nebuchadnezzar’s infirmity,, but the indica¬ 
tions seem to prove him insane. But under the mighty 
influence of the “ Holy One ” and the “ dew of heaven,” 
he was healed , and gave glory to the “ God of heaven.” 
And this was baptism. Notwithstanding his body was 
baptized with the “dew of heaven,” it is evident that his 
heart also had undergone a great change. Yet all of 
this is expressed by the one Greek word in one 

of its forms. 

We now leave the Old Testament and follow the 
history of this matter of baptism into the new dispen¬ 
sation. But let it be understood that these three cases 
referred to in the Old Testament well represent all 
baptism, whether under the old or the new dispensa¬ 
tion, for in each case God was the real factor operating. 


' 





' 

' 












% 

















































































* 















* 






■ 







































, 


























* 



















































/ 














(I 




































































THE FLIGHT 


INTO EGYPT. 


41 




















































































































































































































































































































































































































































PART II 

THE TESTIMONY OF THE GOSPELS 


45 







' 
























































































































































































— 

' 











































































PART II 

THE TESTIMONY OF THE GOSPELS 

CHAPTER III 
JOHN’S BAPTISM 

Passing over all the other baptisms of the old dis¬ 
pensation which might be referred to, we come at once 
to the baptism of John, and will try to ascertain in 
what it consisted. Our endeavor will be to determine 
its nature and character from the record itself, as set 
forth both in prophecy and in its fulfillment under the 
new dispensation, and to ascertain wherein John’s 
baptism differed from the baptisms ordered in the old 
law and most punctiliously observed by the Jews. 

It is exceedingly unfortunate that there have been 
religious teachers who have foisted upon the world and 
the church the belief that water baptism had no part 
or place in the old ceremonial law as ordered by Moses 
and practiced by the Jews, but that it was inaugurated 
by John the Baptist, and perpetuated in the Christian 
church by the authority of Christ and his apostles, 
and that it holds the place under the Christian dispen¬ 
sation that circumcision held under the old law. A 
greater error or a more absurd proposition could not 
be made. This is fully proved, not by human author¬ 
ity, but by the words of inspiration itself. Indeed, it 

47 


48 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


is only necessary to recall the language of Paul in 
Hebrews 9:9, 10, 11 in order to be convinced that all 
the religious washings and purifications ordered under 
the old law were nothing more nor less than baptisms. 
This declaration was in these words: “ Which was a 
figure for the time then present, in which were offered 
both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that 
did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 
which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers bap¬ 
tisms [ dta<popoi$ fianTtfffiois, erroneously or unfortunately 
rendered “washings”], and carnal ordinances, imposed on 
them until the time of reformation. But Christ being 
come,” etc. We here have the revelation that the old 
law was only a law of the observance of outward car¬ 
nal ordinances, among which divers baptisms (dta<p6poi$ 
paTCTHT/j.o'i?) held a conspicuous place, and that these 
were imposed (“a yoke,” Peter styles them, in Acts 
15:10) even under the old law, and upon “them,” 
namely, the Jews, only until the coming of Christ, 
ushering in the “reformation.” Indeed, how any per¬ 
son can read the ninth and tenth chapters of Hebrews 
and not be convinced of the temporary character of 
the old covenant, is beyond conception. It is all done 
away with, saith Paul. “Christ is the end of the law 
for righteousness,” etc. “The Law and the Prophets 
were [only] until John,” etc. “The law is but a 
shadow,” etc. All of these, with hundreds of other 
passages which might be quoted, prove conclusively the 
nature of the old law. 

By what authority, then, are we told that water 
baptism had no part or place under the old dispensa¬ 
tion when such assertion clearly contradicts the 








































JOHN S BAPTISM 


49 


Scripture itself? Had this utterance of Paul been 
properly translated, and had dia<popoi ? fiaxTLffpnu? been 
made to read “ divers baptisms,” as it should have been, 
no man or set of men could have made the world 
believe that water baptism had no part or place under 
the old dispensation and that John the Baptist inaugu¬ 
rated it and Christ and his apostles perpetuated it, 
when the fact is that the entrance of John upon his 
mission and work was the signal which marked the 
end of the old law, as saith the Scripture, “ The Law 
and the Prophets were until John : since that time the 
kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth 
into it” (Luke 16 : 16). “Repent: for the kingdom of 
heaven is at hand,” was the burden of John’s preach¬ 
ing. 

Prior to John, the only promise of justification lay 
in a careful and punctilious observance of the cere¬ 
monies specified in the law. Nothing else was offered 
as a ground of acceptance. But when John came, at 
once the old ordinances were set aside and “ repentance ” 
was substituted by John as a ground of remission of sins. 
The proof of this lies not only in the statement already 
quoted from Paul and Christ, but in the opposition of 
the Pharisees, and their refusal to submit themselves to 
John’s baptism. The disputes mentioned in Scripture 
as occurring between the disciples of John and the 
Jews about baptism, furnish undoubted evidence that 
John had inaugurated a new departure in baptism. 
(John 3 : 25.) Indeed, the statement that many of the 
Pharisees rejected Christ, “being not baptized” with 
John’s baptism (Luke 7 : 30), is another undoubted 
proof that John’s baptism was not after the manner of 


50 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


the law, namely, with ordinary water, else this state¬ 
ment could by no means he true ; for that the Pharisees 
were great sticklers for the baptisms as ordered by 
Moses, will not be denied. How, then, could it be 
truthfully said of them that they were not baptized 
with John’s baptism, if, after all, John’s baptism was 
the same as those ordered under the law, and in sub¬ 
mitting to the one the other was fulfilled ? For that 
the old law was largely a law of divers baptisms 
( dia<p6pots fiaTrTKT/jLois) we have already shown from 
Paul’s own statement, and it may be fully demonstrated 
by referring to the law as enjoined in the writing of 
Moses. 

That this law of divers baptisms and other carnal 
ordinances could never “take away sins” or “make 
him that did the service perfect,” Paul most emphatic¬ 
ally sets forth. (Heb. 10:4; 9:9.) Yet this taking 
away or remission of sins, which is declared by Paul 
to be impossible to the old ceremonial law, is again 
and again particularly specified as being John’s bap¬ 
tism, both in the prophecies and in the story of their 
fulfillment, which fact proves beyond controversy that 
John’s baptism was far other than a mere subscription 
to and administration of any outward ordinance or 
ceremony. Its potency in the remission of sins speaks 
its authorship, and fully answers the inquiry of the 
Master made of the Pharisees, “The baptism of John, 
was it from heaven, or of men?” That it was not 
“after the manner of the purifying [or, baptism] of 
the Jews,” which in John 2 : 6 is declared to be a water 
purification as contained in the “six water-pots of 
stone,” is abundantly manifest. The law of outward 


John’s baptism 


51 


ceremonies can never “take away sins” ; hence John’s 
baptism could not have been outward and ceremonial. 
Nothing could be more clearly demonstrated than this, 
because John’s baptism did take away sin. 

THE AUTHORITY FOR AND THE CHARACTER OF 

John’s baptism. 

That John’s baptism was the “baptism of repent¬ 
ance,” and that “remission of sins” was predicated of 
it, or a resultant thereof, will not be denied. That 
the purification consequent upon an honest repentance 
and confession of sin was the baptism peculiarly desig¬ 
nated John’s baptism, cannot be denied without doing 
violence to God’s truth as set forth in the Scriptures. 
We would therefore expect that the prophets, whether 
in language, or in figure, as in manifestation, or 
outward visible token, would clearly set forth the 
character thereof as being in harmony with this con¬ 
ception. 

The passages of Scripture heretofore quoted, repre¬ 
senting that in the wilderness should water break 
forth, and streams or rivers in the desert, prepare us 
for the spiritual apprehension of the truth taught. 
But if more evidence is demanded, we have it in the 
following : Isaiah 40 : 3-5 : “ The voice of him that 

crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the 
Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our 
God. Every valley shall be exalted, and every moun¬ 
tain and hill shall be made low : and the crooked 
shall be made straight, and the rough places plain [ or, 
smooth] : and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed 
[or, manifested], and all flesh shall see it together: 


52 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.” And in 
Malachi 3:1: “ Behold, I will send my messenger, 

and he shall prepare the way before me,” etc. Isaiah 
62:10: “ Go through, go through the gates ; prepare 

ye the way of the people; cast up, cast up the high¬ 
way ; gather out the stones ; lift up a standard for the 
people.” Malachi 4 : 5, 6 : “Behold, I will send you 
Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and 
dreadful day of the Lord: and he shall turn the 
heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of 
the children to their fathers,” etc. 

That these passages all refer to, and were prophetic 
of, and were all fulfilled in, John, is the declaration of 
the Scripture : John 1:6^ seq.: “There was a man 
sent from God, whose name was John. The same 
came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that 
all men through him might believe. He was not that 
Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light,” etc. 
To this correspond the words of the angel to Zacharias, 
the father of John. Luke 1:13 et seq.: “ But the 

angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy 
prayer is heard ; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear 
thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John. And 
thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall 
rejoice at his birth. For he shall be great in the sight 
of the Lord, .... and he shall be filled with the 
Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb. And 
many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the 
Lord their God. And he shall go before him in the 
spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the 
fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the 
wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared 


John’s baptism 


53 


for the Lord. And his father Zacharias was 

filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, 

Blessed be the Lord God of Israel. And thou, 

child, shalt be called the Prophet of the Highest: for 
thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare 
his ways : to give knowledge of salvation unto his peo¬ 
ple, by the remission of their sins, through the tender 
mercy of our God, whereby the day spring from on 
high hath visited us, to give light to them that sit in 
darkness and in the shadow [or, gloom] of death, to 
guide our feet into the way of peace. And the child 
grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the 
deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel.” 

In harmony with all this preparation and announce¬ 
ment of prophecy, we have the declarations of 
Scripture as to their fulfillment, thus : Matthew 3 :1 
et seq.: “ In those days came John the Baptist, 
preaching in the wilderness of Judea, and saying, 
Repent ye : for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,” 
etc. In Mark 1 : 4, after citing the prophecies already 
quoted, it is declared thus : “John did baptize in the 
wdlderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for 
the remission of sins,” etc. Luke, also (Luke 3:3), 
speaking of John, says, “And he came into all the 
country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of re¬ 
pentance for the remission of sins.” Citing these same 
prophecies to which we have alluded, John, also (John 
1 : 23), added his testimony by recording the fact that 
John himself claimed that he was the one sent of 
God, as said Esaias the prophet. Christ himself 
speaks of John and says 'that he was “Elias, which 
was for to come.” 




54 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


Peter speaks of John’s baptism thus : Acts 10 : 37 : 
“After the baptism which John preached.” Paul spec¬ 
ifies its character thus: Acts 13:24: “When John 
had first preached before his [Christ’s] coming the 
baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel.” And 
again, in Acts 19 :4, Paul declares the character of 
John’s baptism thus : “John verily baptized with the 
baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they 
should believe on him which should come after him, 
that is, on Christ Jesus,” etc. And in various other 
places John’s baptism is specifically defined to be the 
baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, prom¬ 
inent among which is John’s own statement as to that 
which constituted his baptism, as found in Matthew 
3:11: “I indeed baptize you with water unto [or, to 
the extent of; or, as far as] repentance ,” etc. Not only 
does his own declaration, in John 1:33, as to his being 
sent to baptize with water prove the source of his au¬ 
thority to institute a new departure in baptism, but 
the source from which it emanated is positive evidence 
as to the character of the water wherewith the baptism 
was to be effected. Christ’s question to the Jews, 
“The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of 
men?” not only indicates the source of John’s author¬ 
ity for the same, but by specifically characterizing it as 
John’s baptism he gives to it a character separate and 
distinct from those in which they were wont to engage ; 
for Christ well knew that those Pharisees had rejected 
John’s baptism that they might preserve their own 
traditions, even as they now rejected him for the same 
purpose. The Pharisees could not accede to John’s 
baptism without acknowledging its superiority to and 


JOHN S BAPTISM 


55 


supersedure of their own, both as to law and tradition, 
which proves that John’s was far different from theirs, 
and hence was not of earthly water as was theirs. 
(John 2 : 6.) 

It does not seem possible that language more plain 
and specific could be selected wherewith to set forth a 
proposition than is here quoted from God’s Word to 
set forth the character of John’s mission and work. 
And yet, notwithstanding John’s mission is thus so 
specifically declared to be of a spiritual character, and 
anti-ritualistic in its application and results, there are 
still those who believe and teach that John had no 
higher conception of his work and mission than that 
he should stand continuously in the water, striving to 
dip , sprinkle , or pour all who came to him. And in¬ 
asmuch as the narrative states that “Jerusalem, and 
all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan” 
came to him and were baptized, he must have, even as 
they seem to believe that he did, stayed in the water 
all the time. But what nonsense ! There is not the 
slightest evidence that anything of the kind occurred. 
Indeed, as we have seen and will more fully show, 
John’s baptism was far different from the ritualistic 
baptisms enjoined in the old law and practiced by 
the Pharisees and all the Jews. (Mark 7:2; John 
2:6.) John’s baptism was a heart affair. He came 
to “turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and 
the disobedient to the wisdom of the just,” as we 
have seen. To suppose that such a mission could 
be performed through the administration of earthly 
water is to do violence not only to the truth of God 
but to human reason as well. 


56 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


But some will say that John’s baptism is declared to 
have been with water. So it is. But so is Christ’s bap¬ 
tism declared to be with fire. How does it come that we 
are so ready to believe that the water here spoken of 
must of necessity be the earthly element, when we never 
for a moment think of associating earthly fire with the 
baptism of Christ ? And yet there is just as much 
evidence for the one as the other. If we will but stop 
to think that the water with which John is said to have 
baptized those who came to him was of necessity the 
instrument through which the result was accomplished, 
and that the Scriptures so declare, and if we will but 
look at the result accomplished, namely, repentance 
and the remission of sins, we shall at once see that no 
earthly element could by any possibility have produced 
such results. It will be noticed, and indeed the fact is 
universally acknowledged by scholars of every denomi¬ 
nation, that iv udau (“with water,” as it is translated), 
being the dative of instrument, compels the thought that 
the water here spoken of is the agency through which 
repentance and remission of sins are accomplished. 
That this cannot be true of earthly water will certainly 
be conceded, except by the most ignorant and preju¬ 
diced, and forever disposes of the w T hole matter. 

If earthly water baptism could effect such mighty 
results as heart and soul renovation in John’s time, 
who, indeed, is to say that the same results are not 
accomplished thereby to-day ? And therefore the 
churches that teach water “baptismal regeneration” 
are correct, and this old hoary Romish dogma, formu¬ 
lated as it was in the darkest hour of Christianity, and 
pregnant with evil, is nevertheless true, and the creed 


JOHN S BAPTISM 


57 


statements which ascribe to the outward ordinances of 
water baptism all the powers and prerogatives of the 
Holy Spirit of God are, after all, authorized by God’s 
Word, and hence are not to be gainsaid ; for it is 
manifest that if earthly water is the thing here 
referred to, through the agency of which repentance 
and remission of sins are had, then, indeed, earthly 
water becomes the most absolutely important thing 
conceivable, and without it salvation is impossible, 
even as some declare it is. 

THE LOCATION OF BETHABARA. 

It will be remembered that it is declared in Scrip¬ 
ture that John’s baptism occurred at a certain place 
called Bethabara. (John 1:28; 3 : 26 ; 10 : 40.) In 
these passages it is abundantly proved that Bethabara 
was, even as it is to-day upon the map, on the east 
side of the river, “ beyond the Jordan,” and lying some 
little distance therefrom. It will at once appear that to 
represent that “Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the 
region round about Jordan” came to John “and were 
baptized of him in Jordan,” as Matthew puts it, or “m 
the river of Jordan,” as it is in Mark, must of necessity 
be a wrong translation ; for to be baptized in or at 
Bethabara and to be baptized in the river Jordan can¬ 
not be true, unless Bethabara is in the river Jordan. 
But such a thing is nowhere hinted at. Indeed, it is 
very specifically stated that Bethabara is in the desert 
“ beyond ” the Jordan. 

Wherein, then, lies the difficulty ? It is easily ex¬ 
plained. The translators, having no thought but that 
water baptism was the thing being talked about, 


58 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


translated the Greek preposition £v, as used by both 
Matthew and Mark in this story, by the English in 
(“in the Jordan”), notwithstanding the word has a 
score of other definitions, any one of which is as 
legitimate an English rendering of ev as is in. 
Among these various definitions of kv, as given by 
every Greek lexicon in the world, are before, in the 
presence of, in the sight of; and as equivalent to and 
a synonym of and used interchangeably with efc, an¬ 
other Greek preposition, it means near by, in close 
proximity to, in the vicinity of, etc. It will at once be 
seen that had the translators used any of these defini¬ 
tions to describe this matter, such rendering w T ould 
have been in exact harinony with other facts elsewhere 
recorded ; for while it is not true that Bethabara is 
situated in the river Jordan, it is shown both by Scripture 
and by its position upon the map to-day that it is near 
by, in close proximity to, in the vicinity of, the river 
Jordan. How exceedingly unfortunate, then, is it that 
the translators allowed their preconceived notions as to 
water baptism’s being the thing sought to be specified 
to lead them into making such a manifest mistransla¬ 
tion. It but shows, however, the power of preconceived 
opinion. That the preaching and baptism of John 
occurred at Bethabara, and not in the river Jordan, is 
therefore the manifest truth of Scripture. 

But if we grasp another equally manifest truth, 
namely, that the “Jordan overfloweth all his banks 
all the time of harvest,” practically all summer, 
which is no doubt the season of the year when John 
was engaged in the promulgation of his baptism and 
in preparing Israel for the reception of their King, we 


John’s baptism 


59 


shall have another item of interest to contemplate in 
connection with this important event; and especially 
so, as we come to understand that the vast majority of 
Israel’s millions were upon the side of the river oppo¬ 
site to that where John had taken up his stand. 

That Bethabara was the exact site of the last camp 
which Israel pitched in the wilderness prior to their 
passage of the Jordan, cannot truthfully be denied. 
Bethabara lies beyond the Jordan in the wilderness 
almost opposite Jericho. There is therefore something 
exceedingly suggestive in the situation in which Israel 
now finds herself. It was here that centuries before 
Israel had baptized herself in preparation for the 
entrance into the “land of promise” on the morrow. 
(Josh. 3:5.) He who fails to discover in this scene, 
which is here transpiring under the administration of 
John the Baptist, the exact fulfillment of that other 
scene which transpired at this identical spot in the 
centuries gone by, when Israel’s millions were ordered 
to purify, or “ sanctify,” themselves preparatory to their 
entrance upon their promised possession, will fail to 
catch the great truth underlying this whole story. The 
old, as it was enacted in type and in figure in the long 
ago, was here having its realization. Israel was about 
to possess the promise made by God to their father 
Abraham so long ago, “In thy seed shall all the 
nations of the earth be blessed.” Before entrance 
upon this possession, however, Israel must undergo a 
purification, a baptism, which would be the fulfillment 
of that which the former baptism prefigured, namely, 
“the baptism of repentance ,” which John preached. 
And inasmuch as water baptism was the “figure,” and 


60 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


inasmuch as the thing taken to represent a thing is 
never the thing represented, we are forced to the con¬ 
clusion that even John’s baptism must have been of a 
high spiritual character, and such indeed we find it 
was. 

If, again, we will understand that Israel in the out¬ 
ward and fleshly was itself but representative, a figure, 
even as Paul elsewhere most clearly makes manifest, as 
we shall see as we proceed, we shall be still more 
thoroughly impressed with the significance of the 
scenes at this time transpiring. 

THE MODE OF JOHN’S BAPTISM. 

The question has often been asked, How was it 
possible for John during the short period of his 
ministry to have baptized the vast multitudes who 
came to him for that purpose ? Those who do not be¬ 
lieve in immersion as the only mode of baptism, and 
yet believe that John’s baptism was solely a water 
baptism, believe that they have in this physical im¬ 
possibility an unanswerable argument opposing the 
theory of the immersionist, and indeed they have. 
John could not by any means short of the miraculous 
have accomplished the task. He could not have done 
so had he stood in the water all the time. But while 
this is true, the same thing could be said of any other 
mode commonly thought to be the one adopted by him. 
John could not have taken each one separately by the 
hand. He could not have spoken to each one sepa¬ 
rately. He could not even have counted the vast 
throngs that came to him at that time. It could with 
as much evidence be asserted that he held a separate 


JOHN S BAPTISM 


61 


and distinct conversation with each individual who 
came to him to be baptized, as that he personally 
manipulated all who came to him. 

There is not the slightest evidence that anything of 
this character occurred. John came to administer 
baptism, cleansing, purification, to the hearts and 
to the minds of the people. Repentance and the 
remission of all previous sins were the result of his 
preaching. His mission was to make ready the multi¬ 
tudes of the house of Israel for the coming of the 
Lord, “to turn the hearts of the fathers to the chil¬ 
dren, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just.” 
To suppose that such a mission could be fulfilled by 
the administration of earthly water in any form, is 
certainly a “ fundamental error.” But when we under¬ 
stand that the baptism which John preached, and 
which the people are said to have received, was the 
“baptism of repentance for the remission of sins,” we 
can readily see how multitudes could have been made 
the subjects of a baptism of this character in a very 
short space of time. To hear and repent were the 
only conditions. Under such a program “a nation” 
might thus be “born in a day.” 

How Did Moses Baptize Israel f 

It may help us in determining this question as to 
how John baptized if we will stop to inquire how 
Moses baptized the three or six millions of people 
who are said to have been baptized unto him in the 
olden time. How did Moses baptize these mighty 
millions in the short space of time allotted? for that 
but a few hours witnessed the ceremony is the uni- 


62 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


versal conception. Did Moses sprinkle, pour, or im¬ 
merse all the vast army separately and distinctly in 
the waters of the Red Sea? The thing is not pos¬ 
sible of conception, and no person has ever thought of 
such a thing as ever having occurred in this way. 

Well, then, if they were not separately and indi¬ 
vidually manipulated by Moses, how was it done? 
Were they all immersed or sprinkled en masse? No. 
Did the mighty sea overwhelm them? No. Were 
they all wet in any way under the administration of 
Moses? Nothing of the kind is even intimated. 
Indeed, it is specifically declared that they all passed 
over dry shod, and without having so much as the 
soles of their feet wet. There is no person who has 
ever thought that Moses either immersed or even 
sprinkled those people with water, and yet Paul 
declares most emphatically that they “were all bap¬ 
tized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea” 
(I. Cor. 10:2). 

Well, if they were not each one separately manipu¬ 
lated either by sprinkling or immersion, what did 
transpire, and how were they baptized ? If the last 
and highest definition which I gave of baptism is 
remembered, we shall have no difficulty in ascertaining 
just what constituted this baptism under Moses, namely, 
a mighty power or influence which lays hold of a 
person or thing, etc. What w r as it that had drawn 
idolatrous Israel away from their idol worship to follow 
Moses across the sea and into the wilderness ? Was it 
Moses? By no means. Moses well understood the 
hopelessness of such a task undertaken in his own 
strength. He had essayed to do this some forty years 


John’s baptism 


63 


before, in his own name and strength, with disastrous 
results, and he knew better than to undertake it again ; 
so that until Jehovah himself had agreed to go with 
him, thus arming him for his mission, he refused to go. 

Moses possessed the power which he wdelded over the 
hearts and minds of the people because God was with 
him and worked through him. And was this baptism ? 
Certainly. And were all the people laid under the 
mighty power of God’s Holy Spirit and controlled 
thereby, and was it under this mighty power through 
the agency of Moses that Israel forsook Egypt and 
crossed over into the wilderness to worship the God of 
their fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob ? Certainly. 
And was all of this baptism ? Yes. But was there no 
water there ? Oceans of it (or at least a sea full). Yet, 
as we have seen, the people were not affected thereby, 
but they were all baptized with the Holy Ghost to the 
extent of turning away from their sins; for that even 
this was a spiritual and heart affair, Paul establishes 
when he says, in the passage already quoted (I. Cor. 10 : 
3), “And did all eat the same spiritual meat; and did 
all drink the same spiritual drink : for they drank of 
that spiritual Rock that followed them ; and that Rock 
was Christ.” 

This establishes forever the character of the baptism 
here referred to. And this (since it is immediately 
added, “But with many of them God was not well 
pleased”) shows that repentance, and even turning 
away from old sins, a heart affair though it be, may 
be, and often is, of a very temporary character. 

But why this reference to Moses, and the baptism 
of Israel under him? Simply to show that John’s 


64 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


was of like character, namely, accomplished through 
the mighty power of the Holy Ghost. The fact is, 
that the baptism which occurred in both instances 
was that Israel was placed 'under the direction and 
control of the mighty Spirit of God to the extent that 
they followed the divine instruction given through 
Moses and John, and thus, being under the influence 
and control of the Holy Ghost, they were most prop¬ 
erly said to be “all baptized,’’ inasmuch as we have 
seen that the term paTZT&w means just this thing. 
Neither Moses, nor yet John the Baptist, could of him¬ 
self have so influenced Israel as to cause them to turn 
away from their idolatry and return to the worship 
of God. No ; the Holy Ghost was the power invoked 
by both Moses and John whereby Israel’s millions 
might be controlled, and this mighty influence is 
most properly termed baptism, as we have said, not¬ 
withstanding there was very “much water” in both 
instances, as the record clearly shows, although there 
is no evidence that either Moses or John baptized any 
one therewith. And if the baptism of Israel in the 
olden time does not necessarily involve the thought 
that Moses separately and individually sprinkled or 
immersed them with or in water, why must we be 
compelled to believe that John the Baptist personally 
manipulated all the two or ten million that came to be 
“baptized of him”? Can there be any good and 
sufficient reason given why John should have baptized 
Israel differently from Moses? We do not believe 
that there can be. 

The fact is, that the missions of Moses ana John were 
very similar, if not identical, namely, to call Israel 


JOHN'S BAPTISM 


65 


away from their sin and idolatry to the worship of the 
living and true God. Both missions involved the 
preaching of God’s truth and the application thereof 
to the hearts of the people by the Holy Ghost to the 
extent of repentance and confession, the remission of 
sins, and the entrance of Israel upon a higher and 
fuller revelation of God’s truth. In the one case the 
“ promised land ” was the ultimate end. In the other 
the “kingdom of heaven” in the person of Christ was 
to be realized. Hence the baptisms preparatory there¬ 
to. “Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” 
It was thus, and here, and now that Israel was being 
prepared for the introduction of the “kingdom of 
heaven ” as about to be ushered in through the person 
and work of Jesus Christ. It was here that their 
hearts were “sprinkled from an evil conscience” and 
their “bodies washed with pure water,” not in the 
earthly Jordan, but in the “pure river of water of life, 
clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God 
and of the Lamb” (Rev. 22 :1). It was to this “pure 
river of water of life” that was here breaking out in 
the “desert” that Isaiah in prophecy called Israel when 
he said, “Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the 
w r aters,” etc. It was this same “pure water” that Christ 
referred to when he said, “He that believeth on me, 
as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly [or, inward 
parts ] shall flow rivers of living water.” This all, again, is 
but equivalent to the “washing of regeneration.” 
This preliminary washing Israel was now undergoing, 
which was to fit them for the thorough and ultimate 
purging of Christ, namely, the indwelling Spirit of 
God, and earthly water had no place in the program. 

5 


66 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


THE OBJECT OF JOHN’S BAPTISM. 

It is only necessary to honestly receive the Scriptures 
as a creditable witness, in order to be fully convinced 
as to the object of John’s baptism. And if the pas¬ 
sages already quoted are not deemed sufficient, we 
have further and still more definite testimony in the 
statement of John himself as to why he was baptizing 
at this particular time, namely, “that He [Christ] might 
be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptiz¬ 
ing with water h uSan (John 1 : 31). 

We thus learn that the object of John’s baptism was 
to manifest, make known, or exhibit the Christ to Israel 
—not in the outward and physical, for Paul declares 
that the outward and fleshly Jew T s or Israelites were 
not the real and true Israel (Rom. 2:28); and Christ 
calls Nathanael an “Israelite indeed,” that is, a true 
child of Abraham, while saying to the others who 
were children of Abraham “after the flesh” that they 
were not the true children of Abraham, but were 
instead the children of their “father, the devil.” 

These passages, taken in connection with those else¬ 
where quoted which declare that John’s mission was 
to prepare the hearts of Israel for the reception of 
Christ, clearly require the thought that it was to the 
hearts of the people of Israel, and not to their bodily, 
or physical, natural vision that he was to be revealed. 
If we inquire how Christ is made manifest to the 
human heart or soul to-day, we shall be forced to 
acknowledge that it is not by subscription to any out¬ 
ward ceremony or ordinance, but through “repentance 
and remission of sins” wrought by the power of the 
Holy Ghost through the gospel of Jesus Christ; and 


JOHN S BAPTISM 


67 


when we consider that this is exactly that which is 
everywhere in Scripture declared to be John’s baptism, 
we are forced to the conclusion that both the agency 
(namely, the water) and the result of John’s baptism 
were exclusively of a spiritual character. Indeed, the 
plainest declarations of Scripture oppose the thought 
that spiritual things can at all be discerned by the 
outward, fleshly, carnal man, and to suppose that the 
spiritual presence of Christ could be either manifested 
or discerned except through spiritual agencies is 
certainly an error of the gravest kind.. If we will but 
receive this truth, we shall have no difficulty in deter¬ 
mining both the character and object of John’s baptism, 
and in understanding that it is inseparably linked with, 
and is and forever remains the necessary forerunner 
and an integral part of, that complete and thorough 
purging which is a result of the indwelling of Christ. 

No soul, either in John’s day, or in our own, or in 
any coming time, can “ behold the Lamb of God, which 
taketh away the sin of the world,” or so have the 
Christ made manifest to his spiritual understanding 
as to behold him in his beauty or to desire him as the 
“ chiefest among ten thousand ” and the one “ altogether 
lovely,” until through repentance his sins are all 
“washed away,” “blotted out,” through the atoning 
blood of Christ applied to the soul through the Holy 
Ghost working in and through the gospel, in which 
case the “eye of the soul” is made to discern the per¬ 
sonal presence of Jesus Christ standing without, and 
knocking for admittance, and saying, Son, daughter, 
“give me thine heart.” It is at this juncture that the 
soul may respond and throw open the door, saying, 


68 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


“Come, Lord Jesus/’ or the Christ may be excluded, 
and the destruction of the “foundation,” or the cruci- 
fixon of the Christ, be engaged in. It is at this critical 
point that every energy of the Holy Spirit is employed 
to cause us to make a wise choice. At this point not 
only is “Let the Saviour in” urged upon us in song, 
but the Spirit through the gospel urges upon us the 
acceptance of Christ. The Spirit urges us not only 
to “repent,” but to “go on unto perfection.” It not 
only says, “Repent . . . and be converted,” but it 
gives an all-potent reason as an incentive for us to 
do so, namely, “that your sins may be blotted out.” 
Yea, more, and “so there shall come seasons of refresh¬ 
ing” (R. V.). How or from what source? “From 
the presence of the Lord.” 

The thought here expressed is in harmony with 
every other Scripture truth, namely, that there is no 
true refreshing, no thorough purification, no real or 
permanent joy or blessing, which can be experienced 
by any soul save as these are found in the abiding in¬ 
dwelling of Christ in the soul. To prepare the hearts 
of the people for this indwelling of Christ, and for the 
“refreshing” which alone can come from the “presence 
of the Lord,” was the object of John’s preaching. 
That this was the result both anticipated and realized, 
is declared both in prophecy and in the narrative of 
its fulfillment. That the call of God to “repentance,” 
through the instrumentality of this mighty messenger 
and forerunner of the Christ, backed as it was by the 
Holy Ghost, with which John is declared to have been 
“filled,” constitutes the water with which he is said to 
have baptized the people, is most evident. No other 


John’s baptism 69 

could have produced the spiritual renovation said to 
have been accomplished. 

Here, indeed, the “washing of the water of the 
word,” elsewhere spoken of, had its first realization. 
Here, at least, was the “washing of regeneration” pre¬ 
parative to the “renewing of the Holy Ghost” and 
“fire,” which was the thorough purging exclusively 
predicated of the manifest and indwelling Christ. 
Here, through the instrumentality of John’s preaching, 
the “old man” was put off, that the soul might be 
prepared for the “new man,” which is renewed in 
knowledge and righteousness and true holiness, “after 
the image of Him that created him.” That earthly 
water could have the slightest part in bringing 
about results of such character is surely impossible of 
belief. But when we ascribe all to the agency of the 
“water of life,” namely, the Holy Spirit of God, then, 
and then alone, has the story any true worth or sig¬ 
nificance. In view of this as an instrument, John 
could truly say, “ I indeed baptize.” Had his baptism 
been with earthly water, this statement would not be 
true; for earthly water is not indeed , truly, verily 
baptism, all of which words are used both by John 
himself and by Paul, Peter, and Christ with reference 
to and descriptive of the baptism which John preached 
and administered. 

My contention is, that these statements never could 
have been made with reference to John’s baptism had 
it been but a mere ritualistic water purification in 
harmony with the old law ; for that ritualistic or out¬ 
ward purification can by no means be truthfully desig¬ 
nated true baptism, any more than can fleshly or out- 


70 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


ward circumcision be properly designated true circum¬ 
cision, or the manna which the children of Israel ate 
in the wilderness be properly termed the “true bread,” 
or an “Israelite after the flesh” be termed the “true 
Israel.” Yet John’s baptism is everywhere declared to 
be true baptism, which fact at once and forever 
removes it out of the sphere of the earthly and places 
it where it properly belongs, namely, as that which 
is wrought out in the hearts and souls of the children of 
men by the Holy Spirit of God. Water baptism is by 
all authorities held to be but a figure, a sign. Is a 
figure or a sign the real and true baptism ? Certainly 
not, else all reason, logic, sense, yea, Scripture, too, 
are at fault; for it is distinctly declared (II. Cor. 4:18) 
that “the things which are seen are temporal [or, tem¬ 
porary] ; but the things which are not seen are eternal 
[acar^a].” By this we see that the earthly and the 
fleshly, the temporary, are nowhere in Scripture held 
as being the real and true. Hence no outward or cere¬ 
monial cleansing, which, as we have seen, is else¬ 
where declared to be but a shadow, a figure, could by 
any possibility be the baptism of John, which is, as 
we have seen, everywhere referred to as a real and 
true baptism. 

The Master’s remark to Nicodemus involves the 
same thought: “Ye must be born anew” (R. V.). 
“That which is born of the flesh is flesh ; and that 
which is born of the Spirit is [alone] spirit,” etc. 
There is no greater mistake than to suppose that that 
which is fleshly, earthly, or outward is the real or true 
entity, whether we are considering fire, water, or man. 
That which is not seen is alone the real. “The flesh 


John’s baptism 


71 


profiteth nothing,” is a remark of Christ himself, and 
sets forth the same universal truth that we have been 
considering. Hence I say John’s baptism was not of 
man, but of God; spiritual, not earthly ; real, not a 
figure or symbol. 

If Paul’s statement already quoted be true, namely, 
that the outward and ceremonial could never “take 
away sins ” or “make the comers thereunto perfect” “as 
pertaining to the conscience” (Heb. 10:4, 1; 9:9), 
and if these were annulled for the very reason of their 
“weakness and unprofitableness” and because the 
observance thereof “made nothing perfect” (Heb. 
7 :18, 19), how is it possible that John’s baptism was 
nothing but an outward, fleshly ordinance, and yet 
that it did reach and purify the hearts of the people, 
the very thing that is declared to be impossible of 
accomplishment through the outw r ard and ceremonial? 
Evidently there is something very much at fault in 
the logic and reasoning of those who would persuade 
us that John’s baptism was but ritualistic, and in 
harmony with the old ceremonial law, and performed 
through the instrumentality of earthly water. 

JOHN AT A3NON. 

“And John also was baptizing in iEnon near to 
Salim, because there was much water there : and they 
came, and were baptized ” (John 3 : 23). That this is 
not only one of the passages from which water baptism 
in general is taken, but one which is supposed by 
many to teach immersion in water as the only true 
baptism, will be admitted. But the most casual glance 
is sufficient to show T not only that immersion cannot 


72 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


be proved from this passage, but that the argument for 
water baptism in any form drawn from this passage 
rests on a mere presumption or assumption. He who 
would seek certain evidences for water baptism in this 
passage must submit to disappointment. 

Suppose the Scripture narrative of this matter had 
declared that John “was baptizing in iEnon near to 
Salim ” because there was much shade there, or much 
grass, or provender, or victuals, would any person ever 
have supposed that these were mentioned as setting 
forth the fact that John was baptizing in or with these 
things ? Certainly not. Why, then, when the narra¬ 
tive mentions the fact that there was “much water” 
there, must we assume that it is spoken of to set forth 
the nature of the baptism engaged in by John and 
administered to the people ? 

Was there no other reason except its use for baptism 
w T hy water was deemed a necessary factor at this 
time? Is it not known that much more water would 
have been required for other purposes than could by 
any possibility have been required for baptism even by 
immersion? But when we learn that the manner of 
the baptism of the Jews was not by immersion (see 
John 2 : 6, as well as the history thereof from other 
sources), we can see that to be near to the Jordan was 
far more of a necessity in order to obtain water for 
ordinary uses than for baptism. This reference, how¬ 
ever, to “much water” is not made in the inspired 
record to prove the fact of immersion therein, nor yet 
that water baptism in any form was administered ; 
neither is it stated to show the abundant supply of 
water on hand for other necessary purposes; but the 


JOHN S BAPTISM 


73 


reference thereto is no doubt made to furnish infal¬ 
lible testimony to the fact that this whole scene 
occurred at a certain season of the year. For even as 
the references to “Bethabara” £md “the desert” and 
“beyond Jordan” are made to specify place, so this 
reference to “much water” as surely specifies time; 
because the statement as to their being much water in 
“iEnon near to Salim” (if it refers to earthly water) 
can by no possibility be true except at the season of 
the year when the Jordan overflows its banks, because 
iEnon is as far from the Jordan as is Bethabara itself, 
and is hence equally destitute of any considerable sup¬ 
ply of water except at the time of the “swelling of 
Jordan.” 

That this whole matter was, according to prophecy 
and the different types and representations therein set 
forth (and therefore necessary of fulfillment), to occur 
at this particular time of Jordan’s overflow, is true, 
and therefore this fact of there being much water at 
jEnon is given to set forth the fact that the prophe¬ 
cies, types, and shadows prefiguring this event all had 
their proper fulfillment here, and at this time, as we 
shall more abundantly see when we come to the bap¬ 
tism of the Christ. 

It must be evident to the most casual observer that, 
in view of the possibility that the reasons which I have 
here given as to why “much water” is referred to 
in the narrative are the true reasons, it rests with 
those who dogmatically assert that water baptism is 
the thing signified thereby to prove their position ; for 
that a dogmatic dictum cannot be legitimately pred¬ 
icated of a passage of Scripture which is confessedly 


74 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


susceptible of a variety of interpretations, must be 
apparent, and ought to be readily admitted by any 
honest reasoner, and especially so as the passage im¬ 
properly conceived affects the most fundamental 
doctrine of Christianity. 

But there is a much higher and deeper truth specified 
in this remark about “much water” than even this 
which I have referred to. For not alone is doubt cast 
upon the correctness of making this passage refer to 
and teach earthly water baptism by the statement 
already referred to and the arguments already adduced, 
but there is really no absolute evidence that can be 
relied upon as proving that the remark “much water” 
refers exclusively or even principally to the earthly 
element. Indeed, when we refer to the prophecies al¬ 
ready quoted, namely, that “in the wilderness shall 
waters break out [or, gush out], and streams in the 
desert,” and that rt all the rivers of Judah shall flow 
with waters,” and when we comprehend that these 
prophecies were being fulfilled in the abundance 
of the great salvation which was being ushered in 
through the baptism and remission of sins which John 
preached, and when we understand that JEnon was 
not, as was Bethabara (where John first preached and 
baptized), in the wilderness, but was, on the contrary, 
“near to Salim,” even as is specified in the story, we 
begin to see the necessity of the specific statement that 
there was “much water” in Muon also, in view of the 
fact that the prophecies appear to have confined its 
“breaking out” to the wilderness and to the desert. 
Hence the necessary explanation, which reveals the 
fact that not alone to either spiritual or literal wilder- 


john 7 s baptism 


75 


ness or desert was or is the water confined, "but that it 
was even to be found in or near to Salim, the city of 
the living God, where Melchizedec, priest of the most 
high God, officiated as in the olden time. (See Heb. 7 : 
2, 3.) Even in this place there was “much water." 

Who is capable of saying dogmatically that all of 
this mighty breaking forth of waters, and this “much 
water," referred to the earthly and physical element 
alone ? Surely such a position is untenable, and as 
fully so at iEnon as at Bethabara in the wilderness. 
Especially may this interpretation be received in view 
of the great spiritual renovation said to have resulted 
from its overflow and application, namely, repentance 
and the washing away of sin, which, as we have seen 
and shall yet more fully see, was that which is every¬ 
where declared to be John’s baptism. 

John is declared, even as we have seen, to have been 
full of the Holy Ghost—this much, or many, “waters 
of life.” John was the center of it all. Christ himself 
said, “He that believeth on me, ... out of his belly 
[or, inward parts] shall flow rivers of living water," 
namely, the Holy Ghost, of which John was full, 
which was here being experienced, and which Christ 
says shall flow out of those possessed thereof as a liv¬ 
ing stream, flowing out, of course, only to the cleans¬ 
ing and purification of those with whom it comes 
in contact, even as Christ himself remarked, when 
the unclean woman touched but the hem of his 
garment, “I perceive that virtue [healing, cleansing 
power, the Holy Ghost] is gone out of me." Was it 
this same going out of virtue, namely, the spirit of 
life, or the “water of life," from John the Baptist (that 


76 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


flowed out in fuller, larger measure from the Christ 
himself during his life of earthly ministry) that is 
referred to in the statement that “John also was bap¬ 
tizing in iEnon ne^r to Salim, because there was much 
water there ” ? Who is capable of denying the proposi¬ 
tion? It may be caviled at and doubted, but cannot 
be successfully assailed. The fact is, that there was 
“much water” in iEnon when John was there, just as 
there was “much water” everywhere that John went, 
and just as there was “much water” wherever the 
Christ w T ent, or w T herever the apostles went, or wher¬ 
ever the gospel of Christ is preached. Indeed, the 
Holy Ghost flows out of every man who is full thereof, 
to the cleansing, baptism, purification, of all those who 
will receive it. Hence the disciples could baptize in 
the fullest sense of the term as soon as they were 
themselves filled with the power of God on the day 
of Pentecost, as we shall see. To this filling of the 
water of life, and to this work of baptizing the nations, 
all who accept Jesus Christ are called : “Go ye there¬ 
fore,” etc. 


CHAPTER IV 

THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 

I suppose it is true to say that the tenacity with 
which the Christian church still adheres to water 
baptism is because of the belief, hitherto universally 
held by all Christians of every name, that the Master 
submitted himself thereto and engaged therein, and 
by so doing emphasized its importance and stamped 
it as an ordinance binding upon and to be perpetuated 
by his church throughout all the ages of its future 
history ; the thought and argument being that the 
example of Christ is worthy of imitation, and whatever 
the Christ did, or whatever attitude he took or main¬ 
tained toward any ordinance, may safely be followed 
by any and all who bear his name. 

That this is legitimate reasoning I am not disposed 
to deny, except as to such ordinances as were after¬ 
wards repealed. If it could therefore be proved that 
Christ submitted himself to water baptism, and the 
law under which said baptism was administered was 
never repealed, then indeed the advocates of water 
baptism as a Christian ordinance might have some 
ground on which to stand. If, on the contrary, how¬ 
ever, it can be fully established both from Scripture 
and from reason, first, that Christ was not baptized 
with water, and second, that the old ceremonial law in 
which water baptism held a conspicuous place (see old 

77 


78 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


law, and Heb. 9 : 9,10) was afterwards utterly repealed 
and abrogated (Heb. 7 :12, 18, 19), and if it can be 
shown that a new covenant or law was established 
“upon better principles,” then the claim, so universally 
set up, that water baptism is perpetuated in the church 
by the authority of Christ must forever be abandoned, 
and hence one of the greatest props which through 
the centuries has been relied upon as upholding this 
damnable error will be removed, and the church of 
Jesus Christ in thus laying aside this mighty “weight” 
and this wondrous “sin” which has so easily beset her 
will be enabled to run, yea, bound forward, in the 
“race” set before her in the gospel. 

To aid in thus freeing her from this blasphemous 
error which through the centuries has bound her, I 
now address myself, and will fully prove that Christ 
utterly repudiated water baptism and overthrew the 
law of which it was an integral part, and that hence 
its perpetuation in the church is in opposition to his 
wish or authority, and is therefore a grievous sin and 
curse. 

IMPERFECT TRANSLATIONS. 

There are certain facts in connection with this story 
which do not seem to have been considered by those 
who have given us this translation from the original 
Greek, which, when considered, show most conclusively 
that the passage has not been properly translated. 
My own thought is, that all Scripture ought to be read, 
not in the light of preconceived notions, or to make it 
correspond to the prejudices of the translators, but 
that every word should be examined with a critical 
eye, and with a view to find out the exact truth, and 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


79 


as a skillful detective would do, seeking to harmonize 
the testimony in any given case, letting nothing pass 
that will be of the slightest value in determining the 
real truth, and equally careful to accept no theory, 
however plausible, which cannot be harmonized with 
all the known facts. 

This course, however, has not been adopted by the 
translators. There are many evidences that the facts 
have been made to bend to a theory, rather than that 
the theory has been made to conform to known facts. 
This is fully apparent in the manifest effort to trans¬ 
late this whole story so that it will appear that water 
baptism was the principal subject thereof, whereas 
there are many facts that cannot by any possibility be 
made to harmonize with the theory that water baptism 
was the baptism for which Christ came to John, or 
which he received under ( bno ) his administration. In¬ 
deed, it will be shown that every evidence, drawn either 
from reason or Scripture, renders the water baptism 
of Christ not only improbable, but wholly impossible. 

The first argument proving this fact is the one 
already adduced, namely, that John’s baptism was not 
a water baptism in any earthly sense, and hence the 
statement that Christ came to John “to be baptized of 
him” carries with it no presumption that the baptism 
for which he came was a water baptism. On the con¬ 
trary, the presumption is by this fact all against the 
water baptism theory. Again, in looking over the 
different significations of the term fta-Kri^u) as given in 
the lexicons and in the best Greek authorities, we 
discover that there is only one signification of the 
term that by any possibility could have had its ful- 


80 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


Ailment in the Christ. The term means, as I 

have said, to dip, dye, sprinkle, immerse, stain, tinge, 
wet, wash, color, purify, cleanse, imbue, merge into, 
heal, etc. Did Christ come for a baptism which 
would have its fulfillment in any of these? We hold 
and will prove that he did not. Indeed, human 
intelligence demands a more perfect and higher form 
of baptism than any of these for the Christ. 

But is there a baptism which satisfies the most crit¬ 
ical demands of human reason, and which at the same 
time is not only a legitimate expression of the word 
/ 3 a 7 rrt'£>, but is also recognized by the best Greek 
authorities as meeting the highest possible significance 
of the term? Certainly. What is it? 

HOW CHRIST WAS BAPTIZED. 

We have seen that the highest significance of the 
term baptize , according to the best authority, is a mighty, 
all-controlling influence or power which lays hold of a 
man, and to which he submits himself, willingly or 
otherwise ; a power which controls his thought, desire, 
purpose, utterance, and action, bringing the individual 
more or less under its influence, and thus controlling 
his life and shaping his destiny. 

But is this a legitimate interpretation? Yes, as 
recognized by all authorities, both scriptural and other¬ 
wise. Well, is there any evidence that anything of 
this character occurred, and that Christ submitted 
himself thereto? Let those answer who were the 
mouthpiece of God in the olden time, and who, look¬ 
ing forward to this event, prophesied concerning it. 
Let those answer who were eye-witnesses, and who 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


81 


gave us the record of that most wonderful time. Let 
those answer who saw the heavens rent asunder and 
the Holy Spirit descending and resting upon the 
Christ, and who heard the voice saying, “ Thou art 
my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased-” Let 
those answer who declare that “immediately” this all¬ 
controlling power and influence (namely, the Spirit of 
God) drove him “into the wilderness.” Here at last 
we behold that which is a complete fulfillment of all 
Scripture regarding this matter, and which is also com¬ 
pletely satisfactory to human intelligence, a complete 
and truthful meaning of the Greek word poutT&u), and 
the only possible meaning of the term w T hich could 
have had its fulfillment in the Christ. 

Prophecies as to Christ’s Baptism. 

We will first look, as has already been suggested, to 
the old Scriptures as a means by which the character of 
the baptism for which Christ came may be determined. 
And as we do so, we fail to find a single passage which 
by any possibility is capable of conveying the thought 
that water baptism was to have any place under the ad¬ 
ministration of the Christ, while everything else which 
he is to be and to do is set forth in such abundant 
fullness that all language seems to have been ex¬ 
hausted in the proper portrayal of his work and mis¬ 
sion. Indeed, all Scripture fairly bristles with refer¬ 
ences to the pouring out of the Holy Ghost upon both 
himself and his followers, as shown by all prophecy. 
Thus: Isaiah 11 : 1, 2: “And there shall come 

forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse. And the 

Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him,” etc. Isaiah 
J a 



82 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


42 : 1: “ Behold my servant, whom I uphold ; mine 

elect, in whom my soul delighteth : I have put my 
Spirit upon him ; he shall bring forth judgment to the 
Gentiles.” Isaiah 59: 20, 21: “And the Redeemer shall 
come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgres¬ 
sion in Jacob, saith the Lord. As for me, this is my 
covenant with them, saith the Lord ; My Spirit that is 
upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy 
mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of 
the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy 
seed’s seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for¬ 
ever.” Here the Spirit is declared to be the birthright 
not only of the Christ himself, but of liis seed forever. 
Isaiah 61:1: “The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; 
because the Lord hath anointed me,” etc. 

That these references are to Christ is declared in 
Matthew 12:18 and Luke 4 :18. Many other pas¬ 
sages might be cited showing how the baptism prophe¬ 
sied for Christ, and hence, of course, expected and 
received by him, was not that of earthly water, nor 
yet John’s “baptism of repentance,” but was indeed 
the bestowment of the Holy Ghost, which by all 
authorities is held to be the highest possible form of 
baptism, and the one which alone could have been 
prepared by God for his Son, Christ Jesus. 

It is surely legitimate reasoning to hold that the 
“ Elder Brother ” was entitled to, and certainly did re¬ 
ceive, a baptism equal to that which is held to be the 
birthright of every other child of God. If all Christ’s 
followers were promised and do receive the baptism of 
the Holy Ghost as a distinctive badge of their sonsliip 
in God, certainly the fact that Christ received a bap- 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


88 


tism of that character ought not to surprise us, or be 
held as being beyond that which might well be 
expected. 

Fulfillment of Prophecy. 

Again, as to fulfillment of prophecy, John was in¬ 
formed that this baptism, or induement of the Holy 
Ghost, was distinctly and specifically to characterize 
the inaugural of the Christ, and that it should be 
perpetuated in him. John 1 : 33 : “He that sent me 
to baptize with water [ h vdarc ], the same said unto me, 
Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and 
remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth 
with the Holy Ghost.” Again John specifies the 
character of Christ’s baptism thus: “ I indeed [ or, 

truly] baptize you with water unto [or, to the extent 
of] repentance: but ... he shall baptize you with 
the Holy Ghost and wfith fire [ttu^c']” (Matt. 3 : 11). 

That John baptized all the people with the Holy 
Ghost, that is, with the water, is true as declared, but 
only to the extent of repentance, or “ unto repentance,” 
as it is translated. That the Holy Ghost wrought upon 
the hearts of the people cannot be denied, but that this 
descent and operation of the Spirit was not in such 
form or manner as to be discernible to John is evident. 
It was only as he beheld the people flocking to him, 
and as he viewed the accompanying manifestations of 
repentance and confession of sins, which alone can be 
accomplished through the presence and power of the 
Holy Ghost, that he could be sure of its presence, 
even as it is to-day in the preaching of the gospel. 

It was not so, however, in the case of the Christ. In 


84 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


him there could be no work of grace wrought, no 
repentance, no confession, nothing of that kind. 
Hence a different, and in one sense a more tangible, 
token of the descent of the Spirit upon the Christ was 
given, namely, that John was to behold the wonderful 
phenomenon. The statement as to the Holy Spirit’s 
descent and abiding upon the Christ as a visible token 
is specifically declared, leaving no room for doubt or 
argument as to the character of the baptism both 
anticipated and received by and perpetuated in him. 

Again, we have the character of the baptism which 
Christ received at this time referred to by himself, as 
he promised the disciples that they should be baptized 
with the same character of baptism wherewith he 
himself was baptized (Mark 10:39), and then de¬ 
clared, in Acts 1 :5, that they should be “baptized 
with the Holy Ghost,” thus establishing beyond 
controversy the character of the baptism received both 
by himself and his disciples. Peter also declared 
(Acts 10: 38) that Christ was anointed (or baptized) 
with the Holy Ghost. 

Again, human sense, reason, and intelligence de¬ 
mand that the great Saviour of mankind should be 
baptized with the highest possible form of baptism ; 
and as this is conceded to be that of the Holy Ghost, 
said demand is fulfilled therein. 

Again, Holy Ghost baptism must have been the 
baptism anticipated and received, not only because 
this was the only baptism becoming the Son of God 
and because all prophecy and all Scripture assert the 
fact and repudiate water baptism as being Christ’s 
baptism, but because water baptism was an utter im- 



THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


85 


possibility, for water baptism had no other significance 
than as a badge of previous moral defilement upon 
the part of the subject thereof and as expressive of a 
desire to turn away therefrom; and as Christ was 
“ without sin, neither was any guile found in his 
mouth,” he could not possibly have received a bap¬ 
tism which would have represented him to John and 
to all Israel as being morally corrupt and standing in 
need of “repentance.for the remission of sins.” 

But if it were conceded that it was even so, and that 
Christ, being in the room and stead of the sinner, and 
having taken upon himself our sinful nature, thus 
stood in need of moral and spiritual renovation, and 
the humanity in him needed purification, surely such 
a condition would render all the more necessary a bap¬ 
tism superior to that of earthly water, and would make 
that of the Holy Ghost absolutely indispensable, inas¬ 
much as it is conceded that only the Holy Ghost can 
cleanse from moral defilement. And Paul declares that 
the ordinances of the old law, of which water baptism 
was one, could by no means purify the conscience 
(Heb. 9: 9, 10), for righteousness was impossible 
to the old law. 

No Record of Christ’s Water Baptism. 

But perhaps a stronger reason than any yet given 
why water baptism did not occur at this time 
lies in the fact that, in addition to every other reason 
and argument urged, the inspired story of Christ’s 
baptism totally fails to make a record of the fact, while 
at the same time recording another event which repre¬ 
sents Christ in tTie spirit and attitude of prayer, and 


86 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


in the presence of John and of all Israel receiving 
from the hands of the Father himself such baptism as 
by all prophecy and all authority was his right, and 
such as alone was fitting for him to have received, 
and which proclaimed him the Son of God, the world’s 
Redeemer, and which alone was capable of fitting him so 
that he might successfully prosecute his glorious mis¬ 
sion of transforming mankind into the “ image of God.” 

The unanimity of all authorities in setting forth the 
character of the baptism here conferred upon the 
Christ, and this utter ignoring of water , and the failure 
upon the part of all biblical writers, both under the 
old and under the new dispensation, to specify or even 
to hint that the baptism of Christ was a water baptism, 
while especially emphasizing another event which then 
transpired, which by all authorities is designated a bap¬ 
tism, is an omission fatal to the doctrine of water 
baptism, and leaves those who would seek to uphold it 
‘‘ stranded high and dry,” without sufficient water to 
float them over this great “ rock of eternal truth.” 

Had it been the purpose of God to perpetuate 
the old Jewish ordinance of water baptism, all the 
authority of Scripture would have been invoked and 
manipulated to set forth the fact at this time, and 
to emphasize its great importance on this occa¬ 
sion, when the highest representative of the race was 
being inducted into office, when the rite was having 
in him its highest fulfillment, and when a model was 
being furnished after which all future baptisms were to 
be patterned. But, instead of this, we find that there is 
no statement whatever as to the occurrence of water 
baptism. The only thing that at all even suggests 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


87 


such a possibility is that Jesus is said to have come 
“up out of,” or “from” (E. V.), “the water.” We will 
show, however, that there were other and more potent 
reasons why Christ was at the water at this time. 

A Model Baptism. 

If, however, the baptism of Christ is to stand for all 
time as the only model for all true baptism, and if 
Christ not only did then and there establish a prece¬ 
dent of the character of that which is in all after time 
to be considered Christian baptism, but also empha¬ 
sized its great importance by engaging therein himself, 
it certainly becomes a matter of the greatest concern 
to ascertain the exact character of that which here 
transpired. That no man has a right to assume or to 
teach that the baptism here received was that of water, 
is certainly manifest in view of the fact that nothing 
whatever is said as to Christ’s having been baptized in 
that way, while all Scripture specifies most distinctly 
that he was “filled with the Holy Ghost,” or “ anointed” 
therewith. 

From every point of view, therefore, is it not more 
reasonable to suppose that, when the Scriptures declare 
that Christ came to John “to be baptized of him,” this 
mighty induement of the Holy Ghost, which he is 
said by all authorities to have received at this time 
(and which is by equal authority held as being not 
only baptism, but the highest possible form thereof), 
was the baptism for which he is said to have come? 
Yes is certainly the only answer which any candid 
person can make; for if there is a baptism which 
confessedly gives power , and the failure to receive 


88 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


which proclaims spiritual weakness, we should certainly 
expect that He whose business it is declared to be to 
baptize and save humanity would of necessity stand 
in need of and be imbued with this mighty power of 
the Holy Spirit of God, which alone could fit him for 
a great work and mission. 

If all the prophets and lioty men of old, together 
with John the Baptist and all the apostles, were thus 
indued for their great work, is it not an absolute 
necessity for the great Redeemer of man? Yea, 
certainly. The Scriptures plainly declare that the 
Holy Ghost inspired all of these; and that the Spirit 
of Christ is the spirit of prophecy is also the truth of 
God. This, therefore, is plainly that which is referred 
to wdien it is said that Christ came to be baptized of 
John. 

But some will say that John had neither the author¬ 
ity nor the ability to confer the Holy Ghost upon the 
Christ. Now, if this were true, and if the objection 
rested upon any reasonable or scriptural foundation, it 
might have some weight. But the fact is, no evidence, 
scriptural or otherwise, can be given upholding such a 
position. 

The fact that Christ was to .be the recipient of the 
Divine Spirit is proved by the quotations referred to. 
Is there any proof that God could not have conferred 
the Holy Spirit mediately, that is, through human 
instrumentality? Certainly no person will assume 
such a position. Well, then, is there any good reason 
why he should not have done so? John is recognized 
by all authorities to have been the accredited prophet 
of God. All the people, we are told, held him to be 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


89 


so: “For all hold John as a prophet.” Being such, 
yea, more, being the greatest among the prophets, the 
greatest born of women, is there any reason why God 
should not have used him on this occasion to inaugu¬ 
rate with fitting ceremony the great High Priest of 
Israel ? 

The fact is, that this is just what both Matthew and 
Mark say about the matter. “Then cometh Jesus 
from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized l>n6 
him.” What does M mean? According to every 
Greek authority, it means under the influence of, 
under or through the agency or instrumentality of, or 
under the administration of. But is the Holy Ghost 
transmissible in this way? Yes, certainly. Even 
under the old dispensation we have instances of this 
character. Indeed, this same John is he who is said 
to be no other than “ Elias, which was for to come,” and 
who is said to be possessed of the “spirit and power of 
Elias,” who did in the olden time transfer a “double 
portion” of his spirit to his young disciple Elisha, 
which very thing may have been but a prophecy in 
action of the event now transpiring, and a proof of 
the fact that John did here and now divest himself, 
yea, empty himself, of all authority and of all power 
and virtually abdicate in favor of the Son of God, the 
w T orld’s Messiah. That this is what transpired and 
what is involved in the expression “to be baptized of 
him,” cannot be denied. 

Not only is this transfer of the Divine Spirit taught 
in the old Scriptures as being possible, but the New 
Testament is full of instances where the Holy Spirit 
was bestowed through the instrumentality of human 


90 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


agents, who had themselves been thus previously 
indued, which induement and transfer are called a 
baptism, as we shall see as we proceed. I refer at 
present, however, particularly to the baptism of Paul, 
through the direct agency of Ananias, who was sent 
of God to do this very thing. Again, the Holy Ghost 
was conferred upon the Samaritans through the instru¬ 
mentality of Peter and John, who “laid . . . their 
hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.” 

Paul also baptized twelve men at Ephesus by call¬ 
ing down the Holy Spirit upon them. Indeed, as we 
have already seen, and as we shall more fully see, 
Holy Ghost baptism alone is that which is considered 
Christian baptism in the New Testament. 

How eminently fitting, then, that he who was at this 
time ushered into the world as the great Holy Ghost 
Baptizer (John 1) should himself be baptized in that 
way. Indeed, all Scripture abounds in the statement 
that he was so baptized, and John the Baptist most 
particularly declares that the falling of the Holy Spirit 
upon the Christ not only was evidence that he was 
such, but also proclaimed this additional fact: He it is 
“which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.” Could any¬ 
thing be more abundantly proved than that Christ was 
baptized, by or through the agency of John, with the 
Holy Ghost? And is it any wonder that language 
setting forth the fact that Christ was thus baptized 
becomes vague and mystifying and impossible of being 
harmonized with other Scripture truth, when it is 
sought to force it out of its legitimate interpretation 
and to make it apply to water f The very fact that it 
does not harmonize, and that the record in the transla- 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


91 


tion is made to contradict itself, proves most conclu¬ 
sively that the passage has been improperly translated, 
and so warped as to cover up the truth originally in¬ 
tended, and to give prominence to the thought that 
water baptism was the baptism anticipated and 
received by the Christ. And thus the mind and heart 
of mankind have been turned away from the “Lamb 
of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” and 
centered upon a man-ordained ordinance. 

Christ Not in the Water. 

We have already seen that 6x6 as used in this sen¬ 
tence, which the translators have rendered “by,” or “of,” 
properly means under the influence of, or through the 
agency or instrumentality of. 

There is yet another word used in the passage which 
needs attention, namely, efc, which the translators have 
rendered “ in ” in the narrative, thus: “ Baptized of 
[6x6~\ him in [er?] the Jordan.” Now, ei? frequently 
means in or into. But it just as surely means in the 
vicinity of, near by, in close proximity to, as far as, to 
the extent of, until, before, in the presence of, among, 
upon, in order to, for, with a view to, for the use and 
service of, in accordance with, etc.; and as the equiva¬ 
lent of another Greek preposition, kv 9 a variety of other 
meanings are added, as we have seen. It will thus be 
seen that there was no other reason than their own 
choice why the translators used the word in to trans¬ 
late this word efr; and that no position, attitude, or 
action can be dogmatically asserted from the simple use 
of this word, must therefore be apparent. As far as the 
mere use of this word is concerned, nothing whatever 


92 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


as to definite action can be proved. All its claims 
are fully met in the conception that Jesus came to 
John to Jordan for the purposes specified. That this 
is simply that which is intended to be said, is no doubt 
true. That this is the only fact that can be positively 
proved therefrom, is certain. 

But the true reason, no doubt, why the translators 
allowed els, which has so many different meanings, to 
be rendered “ in ” in this passage, was because con¬ 
sistency compelled them to do so. That is, being about 
to translate the rest of the sentence (*«> ebobs dvafiahwv 
d^d rob vdaros), “And coming up straightway out of 
the water,” they had no choice but to render els “in” ; 
for if they had translated els so as to represent that he 
w T as only near by or close to the Jordan, how could 
they afterwards have consistently represented him as 
coming up out of the water f No ; whatever they did, 
they must be consistent with themselves and wfith 
their own rendering; and if they w T ere about to de¬ 
clare that Jesus came directly “up out of the water,” 
they must first be sure that he was in the water. 
Hence they translated els to mean in , notwithstanding 
it has this great variety of meanings, as w T e have seen. 

This position, however, is much more consistent than 
that taken by the translators of the Revised Version, 
who render the two statements made by Matthew and 
Mark respectively by two entirely different readings, 
notwithstanding the fact represented by these writers 
is the same, and is represented in the original by sub¬ 
stantially the same words ; for their translation makes 
Matthew say that Jesus came up from the water, while 
Mark is made to say that he came up out of the water. 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


93 


What miserable juggling is this ! Why did the trans¬ 
lators of the Revised Version thus make Matthew and 
Mark contradict each other, when the language of 
both is of precisely • the same significance in the 
original? Matthew says, ebobg dvifir) d-d rob udaro 95 
Mark says, eu0b$ dvaftaivwv dud rob udaro 9 , which two 
statements are identical, and express the same fact 
exactly, as any person ought to know. The dro of Mat¬ 
thew, which is rendered “from,” is exactly the same as 
Mark’s a™, which is rendered “out of” by these revisers. 
Are from and out of identical in the English ? No; 
by all authority, no. Then why did the translators 
render the same word, used in the same connection, to 
set forth the same identical truth, by two different 
English words, which represent, in the connection in 
which they are used, two entirely separate and dis¬ 
tinct ideas? For coming up out of the water is an 
entirely different statement from coming up from the 
water. 

The only reason I can surmise why the trans¬ 
lators allowed these two passages (which, as we have 
seen, are intended to set forth the same truth) to be 
translated so as to set forth two distinct propositions, is 
that a compromise was entered into between the two 
factions represented upon the revising committee, 
namely, those who believed in sprinkling and those 
who believed in immersion, the one saying to the 
other, We will allow and to be rendered out of in 
Mark, if you will consent that it shall be translated 
from in Matthew. In no other way can I account 
for this most unfortunate misrepresentation of the 
facts. 


94 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


Evidence for Water But Circumstantial. 

This matter of the baptism of the Christ by the 
Divine Spirit is emphasized in all of the Gospels, 
whereas there is not, either in the Gospels or elsewhere 
in the whole book,, any reference whatever to water 
baptism as having been anticipated for or administered 
to the Christ. The whole theory of the water bap¬ 
tism of the Christ has therefore been built upon a 
mere supposition, a wholly illegitimate inference. This 
assumption rests wholly upon (1) the belief that 
John’s baptism was a water baptism; (2) the fact 
that Christ is said to have come to John “to be bap¬ 
tized of him ” ; (3) the statement in the Authorized 
Version that he came “straightway up out of the 
water.” 

It will be seen that the entire evidence for the water 
baptism of the Christ is therefore but circumstantial. 
And were it a question of criminality, and to stand or 
fall according to the evidence, as in a court of law, the 
whole question would fall to the ground for lack of 
proper and sufficient evidence wherewith to prove the 
case. That there is not a word of direct testimony 
from any source whatever going to show that Christ 
was here baptized with water in any manner, I most 
positively assert, and I challenge any man to show the 
contrary. The fact is, that the only circumstantial evi¬ 
dence of any value, having even a tendency to prove 
that water baptism was administered, lies in the state¬ 
ment that Christ came up “from the water.” But if 
we show that he was there for infinitely more potent 
reasons than that he might receive water baptism, 
even this slight evidence will be overthrown. 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


95 


Christ’s Coming Upon the Jordan. 

I will now give the reason assigned by Matthew and 
by all Scripture why water is mentioned in this con¬ 
nection. Matthew refers to it thus : “ Then cometh 

Jesus from Galilee km tov ’ Iopddvtjv Now, the mean¬ 
ing of km is given in every Greek lexicon as follows: 
on, upon, at, to, in, etc., with a variety of other defini¬ 
tions. It will be noticed that the English translators 
have rendered it by the preposition to in this con¬ 
nection. Now, this would have been the proper ren¬ 
dering provided “the Jordan” referred to mere place or 
locality. But there is no evidence that the words “the 
Jordan” refer to place. On the contrary, I confidently 
affirm and will prove that they do not. 

It w T ill be noticed that the translators of the Author¬ 
ized Version, believing that water baptism was that for 
which Christ came to John, and not seeing that the fail¬ 
ure to translate the definite article (row) would make 
any material difference in the sense of the passage, 
simply left it out, and did not translate it at all. But 
the translators of the Revised Version saw that there 
was no justification for such an omission, and therefore 
translated it, although they failed to see the mighty 
significance which lay enshrined in this little Greek 
preposition. The fact is, that by giving this word its 
legitimate place the entire significance of the passage 
undergoes a complete transformation. The Authorized 
Version reads thus : “Then cometh Jesus from Gali¬ 
lee to Jordan unto John,” etc. (Matt. 3: 13). The 
Revised reads, “Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to 
the Jordan ,” etc. 

But what difference does that make? some will 


96 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


say. Do not “Jordan” and “the Jordan” signify 
the same thing? Allow me to inquire if Ohio and 
the Ohio are synonymous? or if we understand 
that when a person speaks of Mississippi, he refers to 
the same thing as if he had said the Mississippi? It 
requires no argument to show that “Mississippi” refers 
to the State, and that “the Mississippi” refers to the 
running stream of water known as the Mississippi. 
So it is with “Ohio” and “the Ohio,” and so with “Jor¬ 
dan” and “the Jordan.” “Jordan” refers to and 
includes the section of country all about the river, 
whereas “the Jordan” refers specifically and exclu¬ 
sively to the running stream of water called the Jordan. 
It will at once be seen that the use of the definite 
article “the” so changes the significance of the lan¬ 
guage as that place is not the thing specified, but that 
the river Jordan is referred to. 

Well, what if it is? some will inquire. What differ¬ 
ence is there in the sense? All the difference 
imaginable. The language in the Greek, as I have 
said, is In't tov * Iopdavrjv . Now when the definite article 
rou is left out, making the passage read as if it were 
thus : im ’Iopddvrjv } then locality or place would be the 
thing specified, and “to Jordan” would have been the 
proper English translation, ,whereas by translating rov 
it removes the remark out of the sense of locality, and 
compels us to translate im by upon instead of by to, as 
the translators have done. 

Scripture Illustrations of the Use of ’ EtzL 

I will give two or three illustrations of how hci is 
elsewhere used in Scripture. Matthew 4:5: “ Then the 


VIEW OF THE SEA OF GALILEE FROM TIBERIAS 
















i *' 


'( 















































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


97 


devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth 
him on [or, upon] [^:'] a pinnacle of the temple.” 
Matthew 14 : 25, 26 : “ And in the fourth watch of the 
night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea. And 
’when the disciples saw him walking on [or, upon] the 
sea[<?7r: rr y v odXaffaav]” e tc. Also Matthew 21 : 5 : “Tell 
ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh 
unto thee, meek, and sitting upon [^c'] an ass,” etc. 

Numerous other passages might be cited, but these 
will suffice to show how this word tni, with the accusa¬ 
tive case and associated with the idea of motion, is 
used. Jesus placed upon a pinnacle of the temple; 
Jesus walking upon the sea ; Jesus riding upon an ass ; 
Jesus coming £-), ’ Iopddvrjv . In all of these expres¬ 
sions, the accusative case follows the preposition, and, 
according to all authorities, it must be translated on or 
upon. How silly it would be to say that the devil set 
Jesus to the pinnacle of the temple ; or that he came to 
the disciples walking to, rather than upon or on, the 
sea ;• or that he came into Jerusalem riding to, rather 
than upon, an ass. And yet I declare, without fear of 
the statement’s being truthfully refuted, that such ren¬ 
dering would be no more erroneous than the one which 
makes Matthew say that Jesus came from Galilee to 
Jordan, when it is specifically declared that Jesus came 
from Galilee upon ( km) the Jordan , thus making it the 
route by which he traveled, even as on various occasions 
he traveled upon the waters of Galilee. The Jordan 
and the water are used in this story not to indicate 
that water baptism was engaged in, but to specify the 
route over which Jesus came in coming to Bethabara. 

But the first question will be, Was this possible or 


98 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


necessary? There is no earthly reason why Jesns 
should not have come upon (^c") the Jordan all the 
way from Galilee, if he chose to do so. The simple 
fact is, that while it is not necessary to assume that he 
did come all the way upon the Jordan, there was in all 
probability no shorter or better route, and inasmuch as 
the swelling Jordan, stretching out in all its fullness, 
lay between Galilee and Bethabara, he must of neces¬ 
sity have come over and upon the Jordan. There was 
literally no other way to come to John than to cross 
over the Jordan ; for Galilee, as we know, is upon the 
west side of the river, while Bethabara was and is in 
the wilderness beyond or upon the eastern side thereof, 
and the only way that Jesus could have avoided cross¬ 
ing over upon the Jordan would have been to perform 
a miracle and transport himself across supernaturally. 
But there is no evidence whatever that anything of the 
kind occurred. Indeed, had such a thing transpired, 
the narrator would, no doubt, have specified the fact. 
No; the most likely thing in the world would be 
Christ’s coming upon the Jordan, inasmuch as nothing 
else was possible, because, as we have seen, the “ Jordan 
overfloweth all his banks all the time of harvest” 
(Josh. 3: 15). 

Again, we believe that Matthew used ini in the sense 
of upon , because to can by no possibility represent that 
which Jesus did at this time. If Jesus only came to 
the Jordan at this time, then the additional statement 
that he came to or unto John is not true, inasmuch as 
John was, as says the account, upon the other side of 
the river, with a vast sheet of water lying between him 
and the Christ; and to have come from Galilee to the 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


99 


Jordan can by no means be a truthful representation 
of the action of Christ, who, as we have seen, must 
have passed over the Jordan in order to come to where 
John was. 

But it may be inquired, Why did not the discovery 
and insertion of the definite article by the translators 
cause them to give km its true significance? Simply 
because they still thought that the phrase i~) TOV ’I Of)- 
ddsrjv referred to place, in which event to w r ould be the 
proper word to use wherewith to translate km. They 
evidently never took into consideration the physical 
environments wdiich I have pointed out. Had they 
done so, by no possibility could they have translated 
£tt:' by to, because, in addition to the grammatical error 
involved, they would have discovered that to, as I have 
shown, could by no possibility describe truthfully the 
action of Christ at this time ; for that to come to the 
Jordan is not equivalent to his necessary passage over 
the same must be conceded. 

I suppose, however, that the conception of the trans¬ 
lators was simply the universal conception, namely, 
that Christ and John were both upon the same side of 
the river in the first instance, and that there was no 
crossing over necessary, but that John stood either in 
the water or close thereto, and as the candidates for 
baptism came to him he either sprinkled or immersed 
them, as the case may be, and that after this was done 
the individuals departed, making room for others, who 
followed their example. 

But as we have seen that nothing of this character is 
taught or possible, and that John’s baptism was a heart 
affair, and that it occurred “ beyond,” or across, the Jor- 


100 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


dan, in the very place where centuries before Israel 
had been purified under Joshua before crossing over to 
possess the land promised by God to their fathers 
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, we begin to realize that, 
the conception of the translators being wrong, their 
translation must of necessity be wrong; for that a 
wrong conception must of necessity be expressed in 
wrong terms will be conceded. There can be no 
reasonable doubt, however, that if the translators had 
grasped the situation as it has here been pointed out 
they would have translated this passage in harmony 
with the facts. 

But are there any reasons other than those already 
given why the Christ came to John upon the Jordan? 
Might he not have come otherwise, except for reasons 
already specified ? Allow me to inquire if there was 
any good and sufficient reason why he should have 
fled into Egypt or turned aside into Nazareth, or why 
he came into Jerusalem sitting upon an ass? At 
once we respond, Yes. Why? In order that prophecy 
might be fulfilled, namely, “Out of Egypt have I 
called my son” ; and again, “Rejoice greatly, 0 daugh¬ 


ter of Zion: . . . . behold, thy King cometli unto 
thee: . . . . lowly and riding upon an ass, and upon 


a colt the foal of an ass”; and again, “He shall be 
called a Nazarene.” 

Christ’s Coming Upon the Water Prophesied . 

If, then, there are any direct and specific prophecies 
which would have their complete and literal ful¬ 
fillment in Christ’s coming upon the water at this time, 
then his coming in this way was not only a possibility, 




THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


101 


but an absolute necessity, inasmuch as all prophecy 
concerning him must have its sure and certain fulfill¬ 
ment ; for he himself declared that “all things must be 
fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and 
in the Prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me.” 

We find that the Old Testament is full of typical 
allusions to the coming great salvation that was to be 
wrought out in Christ, Among these various types 
and figures we find that water holds a conspicuous 
place. Not only does the chaotic condition of the 
world in the very beginning, when the “ Spirit of God ” 
is said to have “moved upon the face of the waters,” 
represent physical conditions then prevalent, but the 
language is of much deeper significance as an exact 
portrayal of spiritual conditions obtaining in prehis¬ 
toric times, ere man had in any measure emerged from 
the “blackness of darkness” which then enveloped him, 
and which was an exact index of that mighty distance 
from light and truth and the knowledge of God at 
which man moved before the “Spirit of God” had at 
all commenced to operate upon the chaotic and form¬ 
less mass of human nature. As Paul declares, “that 
was not first which is spiritual, but that which is 
natural [or, earthly] ; and afterward that which is 
spiritual.” 

The first man or race of men, was of the 

earth, earthy (really made of dust). Such was man 
in the prehistoric times. But the mighty Spirit of 
God, by which man has ever drawn near to God, was 
even then operating, and, as we discover, his work was 
not in vain, for out of the depths of that universal 
darkness, man, under the manipulating hand of the 


102 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


Divine Spirit, is seen to emerge until Adamic and 
Edenic conditions prevail. And although but two 
persons arose from that “ great deep ” as the fruitage of 
the mighty Spirit’s brooding, they were of such character 
as to be able to receive the impress of the Divine, the 
“ breath of life,” the Holy Spirit of God, and thus they 
were made the nuclei around or through whom God 
might in the ages to come gather to himself a mighty 
progeny of those who would inherit his nature and be 
his children in deed and in truth. Thus two living souls, 
termed so in contradistinction to the universal death 
from which they came, entered upon the upward 
pathway, rescued by God from the “ blackness of dark¬ 
ness forever.” 

The next glimpse which we have of the spiritual 
advance of humanity and the reduction of the distance 
between mankind and Godlikeness discloses eight per¬ 
sons as the fruitage of the Spirit extracted from the 
great tree of humanity, as through sixteen centuries 
God’s Spirit had striven with the race, and although 
the “waters of the flood” still cover the “face of the 
earth,” representative humanity passes over it as a 
mighty highway to a “better land.” 

The centuries pass, and the generations flee away, 
and once again we view humanity, but under more 
favorable circumstances; not in absolute darkness, as 
in the first instance, nor yet with the mighty Noachian 
deluge swelling all about them, illustrative of spiritual 
conditions, or, as Peter declares, a figure of a yet 
coming baptism, in and through which humanity 
would be drawn near to God in complete salvation ; 
but a comparatively small though turbulent sea 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


103 


now serves to represent their moral and spiritual 
condition and their distance from God. Although it 
is stated that God was not well pleased with many of 
the number who, under the leadership of Moses, 
passed through the swelling waters of the Red Sea 
(and hence their “carcasses fell in the wilderness”), 
humanity was, notwithstanding that fact, represented 
by a mighty host, who moved from “Egyptian bond¬ 
age,” and, led by God’s Spirit, and walking in its light, 
“ a pillar of cloud by day, and a pillar of fire by night,” 
reached a point where they stood, although they knew 
it not, infinitely nearer to God than humanity had 
ever come before. 

Not for long is there a halt made, however, but, 
moving now with accelerated speed, each day’s experi¬ 
ence brings them closer and still closer to God, until 
once again they stand before a swelling flood, 
for “Jordan overfloweth all his banks.” But how 
insignificant the stream that now divides, and that 
represents, not the distance of humanity from God, but 
the nearness of man’s approach to him. As they 
look back over the past ages, from the midnight dark¬ 
ness of the prehistoric time unto this hour, which has 
in it much of promise of the rising day, well may 
they exclaim, “What hath God wrought!” And as 
Joshua (figure of the Christ) leads the now almost 
countless hosts of Israel through the waters of the 
Jordan, we realize that Jordan is also “driven back.” 
And now T arise prophet, and seer, and bard, all of 
whom, like the watchman upon the high tower of Zion 
waiting for the first tokens of the coming day, lift up 
their voices with one accord, and in response to the 


104 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


oft-repeated inquiry, “Watchman, what of the night?” 
repty, “The morning dawns ; arise ! arise !” 

But again the centuries pass, and the generations 
come and go, and Israel once more find themselves be¬ 
fore this same swelling floood, stretched out, overflowing 
all its banks as in the olden time. 

Israel’s Mighty Leader. 

But who is now the leader of the hosts? Who is 
the Adam, the Noah, the Moses, or the Joshua of this 
new movement? Is he present? Where is he? But 
we look in vain for the token of leadership. It is true 
that a “voice” is heard crying in the wilderness, and 
saying to Israel, “Make straight in the desert a high¬ 
way for our God,” and, “Repent ye : for the kingdom of 
heaven' is at hand ” ; but when questioned as to his 
leadership, he “confessed, and denied not; but con¬ 
fessed, I am not the Christ,” but “there standeth one 
among you, whom ye know not; the latchet of whose 
shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose,” etc. 

But who and where is he, the great Leader of Israel ? 
How shall he make his appearance, and what shall be 
the sign of his coming? Shall he come as in the 
olden time, in prehistoric days, and move, as did the 
mighty Spirit of God then, “upon the face of the 
waters ”? or as upon the flood he rode with Noah? or 
as Moses or Joshua dividing the waters? all of whom 
were but figures of himself. May we expect him as in 
the olden time? Will the token of his presence be the 
same? Yea, verily, “the voice of the Lord” is still, as 
in the olden time, “powerful” and “full of majesty.” 
“ The voice of the Lord shaketh the wilderness; the 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


105 


Lord shaketh the wilderness of Kadesh.” Also, “the 
God of glory thundereth : the Lord is upon many 
waters.’’ “ The Lord sitteth upon the flood ; yea, the 
Lord sitteth King forever” (Ps. 29:10). “Thou 
didst divide the sea by thy strength : thou breakest the 
heads of the dragons in the waters. . . . Thou didst 
cleave the fountain and the flood” (Ps. 74: 13-15). 
Till all rejoice, saying, “0 come, let us sing unto the 
Lord. ... In his hand are the deep places of the 
earth ; the strength of the hills is his also. The sea is 
his. ... 0 come, let us worship and bow down ; let 

us kneel before the Lord our Maker. For he is our 
God. . . . To-day if ye will hear his voice, harden not 
your heart, as in the provocation, and as in the day of 
temptation” (Ps. 95: 1-8; Heb. 3: 8, 15). “'O sing 

unto the Lord a new song. . . . Give unto the Lord 
glory and strength. . . . Say among the heathen that 
the Lord reigneth . . . : he shall judge the people 
righteously. Let the heavens rejoice, and let the earth 
be glad ; let the sea roar, and the fullness [or, over¬ 
flow] thereof. Let the field be joyful, and all that is 
therein ; then shall all the trees of the wood rejoice be¬ 
fore the Lord ; for he cometh, for he cometh to judge 
the earth : he shall judge the world with righteousness, 
and the people with his truth” (Ps. 96). It was here 
also that the “pastures of the wilderness” were greatly 
refreshed “ with the river of God that is full of water ” 
(namely, the Holy Spirit). It was here that 
this prophecy also found its complete fulfillment: 
Psalm 77 : 15-19 : “Thou hast with thine arm re¬ 
deemed thy people. . . . The waters saw thee, 0 God, 
the waters saw thee ; they were afraid : the depths also 


106 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


were troubled. . . . The voice of thy thunder was in 
the heaven : the lightnings lightened the world : the 
earth trembled and shook. Thy way is in the sea, and 
thy path in the great waters, and thy footsteps are not 
known.” Habakkuk 3: 8-15: “Was thine anger 
against the rivers? Was thy wrath against the sea, 
that thou didst ride upon thine horses, and thy 
chariots of salvation ? . . . Thou didst cleave the earth 
with rivers. The mountains saw thee, and they trem¬ 
bled : the overflowing of the water passed by : the 
deep uttered his voice, and lifted up his hands on 
high. . . . Thou wentest forth for the salvation of 
thy people, even for salvation with thine anointed 
[thy baptized one]. . . . Thou didst walk through 
the sea with thine horses, through the heap of great 
waters.” 

“Let the Sea Boar” 

Psalm 93 : 3, 4 : “ The floods have lifted up, 0 Lord, 
the floods have lifted up their voice ; the floods lift up 
their waves. The Lord on high is mightier than the 
noise of many waters, yea, than the mighty waves of the 
sea.” Psalm 98 : 7-9 : “Let the sea roar, and the full¬ 
ness [or, overflow] thereof. . . . Let the floods clap 
their hands : let the hills be joyful together before the 
Lord : for he cometh to judge the earth : with right¬ 
eousness shall he judge the world, and the people with 
equity.” Isaiah 33 : 21, 22 : “The glorious Lord will 
be unto us a place of broad rivers and streams ; where¬ 
in shall go no galley with oars, neither shall gallant 
ship pass thereby. For the Lord is our judge,” etc. 
Isaiah 35 : “ The wilderness and the solitary place shall 
be glad for them. . . . They shall see the glory of the 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


107 


Lord, and the excellency of our God. . . . Behold, 
your God will come . . . ; he will come and save you. 
Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened . . . : for 
in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams 
in the desert. . . . And an highway shall be there, 
and a way,” etc. 

It requires no argument to prove that these prophe¬ 
cies refer to the time of which we are speaking. But 
these are not all. Isaiah 40 : “ Comfort ye, comfort ye 
my people, saith your God. . . . The voice of him 
that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of 
the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for 
our God [mark you, a highway for our God in the 
wilderness. Now, let us see the physical character of 
this highway which stands for such a great spiritual 
truth]. Every valley shall be exalted [or, filled], and 
every mountain and hill shall be made low : and the 
crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places 
plain [or, smooth] : and the glory of the Lord [namely, 
Christ] shall be revealed [“That he should be made 
manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with 
water/’ said John the Baptist], and all flesh shall see 
it together . for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.” 

Now, it must be conceded that if the great spiritual 
truth inhering in this passage has also a physical 
counterpart, and if Christ did find a way in the literal 
“wilderness of Judea” of the character indicated, 
namely, in which every valley was filled and every 
mountain and hill over which the way extended was 
laid low, and in which the crooked places were made 
straight and the rough places smooth, then, indeed, no 
other than a water highway could by any possibility 


108 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


fill the conditions specified. Indeed, a highway in the 
desert or wilderness embracing these features was never 
a literal fact or possibility, except as the Jordan over¬ 
flowing all its banks furnished such a highway. We 
hold this as an infallible and unanswerable argument 
proving the fact that Christ did come, even as Matthew 
says he did, upon the water. For notwithstanding 
that this is representative of a great spiritual truth, it 
is not conceivable that a spiritual truth should be 
typified by that which has no literal existence. In¬ 
deed, literal phenomena alone can be used to represent 
spiritual things, and while it is true that the thing 
taken to represent a thing is never the thing repre¬ 
sented, it is equally true that that which is taken as a 
representative must have a literal existence in itself; 
so that a literal highway in the desert can alone be 
used to truly set forth the spiritual truth which it 
represents. And the only literal highway possible of 
the character specified w T as, as I have said, the over¬ 
flowing Jordan. In no other way could the spiritual 
truth here represented have a literal base from which 
a truthful figure could be drawn. 

That all of these prophecies do not refer to God’s 
past dealing with his people in the olden time, in the 
dividing of the sea and of the river under Moses and 
Joshua respectively, is most conclusively shown. In¬ 
deed, God takes especial care to inform the people that 
he is not referring to things past, but to things to 
come. So anxious is he to impress this thought upon 
their minds that he even urges them, through the 
prophet, to forget the olden time, and turn their 
thoughts to the future ; for it is of the future that he is 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


109 


speaking. Isaiah 43:14, et seq.: “Thus saith the 
Lord, your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; . . . I 
am the Lord, your Holy One, the Creator of Israel, 
your King. Thus saith the Lord, which maketh a 
way in the sea, and a path in the mighty waters. . . . 
Remember ye not the former things, neither consider 
the things of old. Behold, I will do a new thing: 
now it shall spring forth ; shall ye not know it? I will 
oven make a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the 
desert,” etc. 

In Isaiah 51 the cry is heard setting forth the pray¬ 
erful desire of humanity that God would once again 
manifest himself: “Awake ! awake! put on strength, 
O arm of the Lord ; awake ! as in the ancient days, in 
the generations of old. Art thou not it that hath cut 
Rahab, and wounded the dragon? Art thou not it 
which hath dried the sea, the waters of the great deep ; 
that hath made the depths of the sea a way for the 
ransomed to passover?” Here the past action of God 
in behalf of his people in the olden time is cited as an 
all-sufficient premise upon which is predicated the 
reason for the present and future action of God on be¬ 
half of humanity. The argument of the cry is, Thou 
didst do it for thy people in the past. “Awake ! put 
on strength,” and again ride forth gloriously “ conquer¬ 
ing and to conquer.” 

Preparation for such an event, yea, the promise of 
such awakening, is given in Isaiah 62: 10: “Go 
through, go through the gates ; prepare ye the way of 
the people; cast up, cast up the highway ; gather out 
the stones; lift up a standard for the people.” And 
this also: “Say ye to the daughter of Zion, Behold, 


110 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


thy salvation cometh.” Isaiah 35:10: “The ran¬ 
somed of the Lord shall return, and come to Zion 
with songs, and everlasting joy upon their heads: 
they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and 
sighing shall [forever] flee away. 5 ’ Here we see that, 
whatever the temporary or partial character of the 
redemptions or salvations of the olden time, this lan¬ 
guage refers to an everlasting salvation, from which 
there is to be no degeneracy or turning back, but 
which is to be everlasting in character. Certainly of 
Christ alone, and of his full coming and complete 
redemptive work, can such high and mighty things 
be predicated. We may well anticipate that the 
historic fact must soon fulfill this prophetic utterance, 
and hence we find Matthew detailing the fact of 
Christ’s coming upon the flood , even as predicted. 

A Straight , Smooth Highway. 

The proof that this highway, which was to be cast 
up in the desert, was to be a water-way , is that it was 
to be a straight way : “ Make straight in the desert a 
highway for our God.” I contend that nothing but a 
water-way, of the character of the overflowing Jordan, 
could by any possibility furnish a smooth , straight 
highway in the wilderness of Judea, abounding as it 
does with innumerable hills and valleys. What else, 
I ask, could produce such a phenomenon? There is 
no other conception possible. The Jordan itself could 
by no possibility have fulfilled these conditions and 
furnished such a highway except at the time of its 
overflow, when its waters spread themselves over all 
the adjacent country, thus obliterating both hill and 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


111 


valley, and literally making an absolutely straight 
highway in the desert. 

Another evidence that this straight highway in the 
desert, over which the “Redeemer, the Holy One of 
Israel,” should come, would be a water highway, is that 
notwithstanding it was to be in the wilderness, the 
natural home of all “ravenous beasts,” they yet could 
not travel upon this way. Isaiah 35 : 8 et seq.: “And 
an highway shall be there, and a way, and it shall be 
called The way of holiness; the unclean [unbaptized] 
shall not pass over it. . . . No lion shall be there, nor 
any ravenous beast shall go up thereon,” etc. 

While this undoubtedly teaches a great spiritual 
truth, it has, yea, must have, its physical counterpart 
and fulfillment, and the only physical counterpart pos¬ 
sible is a water highway , such as the overflow of Jordan 
constituted at this time. That this scene transpired 
during the “overflow of the Jordan” is proved by the 
statement already referred to, namely, that during this 
time, or the time of these occurrences, there was “much 
water in iEnon, which is near to Salim,” a statement 
which is by no possibility true except when the 
Jordan overflows its banks; for there is not “much 
water” anywhere in that country except at the time of 
Jordan’s overflow. Jordan itself has not “much 
water” except at this time. 

Another proof lies in the appropriateness of the 
thing. The highest wdsdom would certainly dictate 
that such an event should occur in the summer time 
rather than in the winter season. Many who believe 
in water baptism by sprinkling make great capital 
against those who seek to show that immersion in 


112 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


water is the only correct mode of baptism, by showing 
how unlikely it is that Christ should institute, for an 
ordinance to be enforced the world around, immersion 
in water, when the rigors of winter and high latitudes 
would render immersion in water exceedingly incon¬ 
venient, and in some places absolutely impossible. 
The same thought would necessitate that the coming 
of the Christ, and the scenes and incidents necessarily 
dependent thereupon, should occur at a season of the 
year when the entire people might take up their abode 
in the open air, and go from all parts of the land to 
Bethabara, in the wilderness, there to await, according 
to both prophecy and the history of the case, the com¬ 
ing of the Messiah. No other season but the summer 
time would be at all suitable for such an exodus into 
the desert. To say that God would be indifferent to 
such matters would, I am convinced, be a libel upon 
the character of God. 

Bethabara an Historic Place. 

Again, the fact that Joshua, who was the figure of 
the Christ, led Israel in the olden time up to the banks 
of this same Jordan, at this precise spot, at the time of 
the overflow thereof (see Josh. 3: 15), is in itself 
significant; for it must be remembered that all the 
scenes and incidents which then transpired pointed to 
and were prophetic of the entrance of humanity into 
the new and better “land of promise,” abounding with 
the “old corn” and “oil” and “wine” of the grace of God, 
as under the dispensation of Christ, which dispensation 
was now about to be ushered in, and all the types and 
shadows, figures, and imagery of the old dispensation 


THE FORDS OF THE JORDAN NEAR RET1IABARA AT LOW WATER 











































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































■ 







































































■ 
















• m m 

. 4' 








I I 

E k B I 1 

; 

a • 


. t 



















THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


113 


were to have their full realization in the kingdom of 
Christ. Hence John’s cry, “Repent: for the kingdom 
of heaven is at hand.” To John, as to his great pred¬ 
ecessor Moses, was given the privilege of bringing 
Israel up to the borders of the promised land. But as 
Nebo and Pisgah were the boundary beyond which 
Moses could not pass, even so Bethabara marked the 
terminal of John’s ministry. 

While it may be true that we do not fully under¬ 
stand, and are hence not fully able to interpret cor¬ 
rectly, all the imagery of the past as involved in this 
story, yet it is manifest that Joshua prefigured the 
Christ, and that where the feet of Joshua and the 
“priests that bare the ark” rested, even within the 
brim or edge of Jordan, as in the olden time, even in 
this historic and sacred spot must the Christ stand as in 
the attitude of prayer. (See Luke.) He awaited such 
inauguration as became the mighty “Captain of our 
salvation” and the invincible Leader of the hosts of 
Israel. That John, being the representative of God 
(“I will send my messenger,” etc.) and being “filled 
with the Holy Ghost,” as he is said to have been, was 
fully able to rightly interpret the Scriptures regarding 
this whole matter, and hence well understood just how 
Christ was to come, will be acknowledged. He there¬ 
fore, through the power of the Holy Ghost, had gath¬ 
ered Israel about this historic spot to witness the com¬ 
ing and inauguration of the Messiah, their King. 

If it could be proved that Joshua (personifying 
Christ) was inaugurated into his office of leader of the 
hosts of Israel through the rite of water baptism, even 
this could not be cited as being anything more than 
8 


114 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


figurative, and could not be held as proving that Christ 
submitted himself to the same. But when we learn 
that even Joshua was not inducted into office through 
this ordinance, but that Moses laid his hand upon him 
calling down the “spirit of wisdom” upon him (Deut. 
34:9; Num. 27 : 18-20), which “spirit of wisdom” 
was nothing less than this same Holy Spirit of God, 
of which we have been talking, we begin to realize 
something of what John the Baptist was called upon 
to do in the inauguration of Christ, thus filling him 
with the Holy Ghost. Indeed, the early church fathers 
assert that John laid his hand upon the head of Christ. 
How truly might John have felt himself unworthy to 
perform such a sacred task ! 

If it is true that Christ came upon the floods of the 
spreading Jordan, which at this time had “lifted up 
itself,” overflowing all its banks, and thus furnishing 
“in the desert a highway for our God,” how fitting 
that they, with the little hills and all the trees of the 
forest, should be represented as rejoicing, as being glad 
and shouting, yea, roaring, with joy and gladness. 
And how exactly all this fulfills the prophecy in its 
physical aspect. 

Again, the fact that Jesus (according to all authority, 
as we have seen) came up from Galilee to Bethabara 
upon the water, makes very clear and altogether natural 
another statement contained in the narrative, which is 
referred to thus: “ And straightway coming up out of 
the water,” etc. Those who believe that Christ was 
baptized with water have based their belief very largely 
upon this statement that Christ came up out of (or 
away from) the water, their argument being hitherto 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


115 


that if it had not been intended to teach the water 
baptism of Christ there would have been no good 
reason for mentioning water at all in connection with 
his baptism. But since we have discovered other and 
more potent reasons why water is mentioned in the 
narrative (namely, that he made it the route by which 
he traveled, and in*so doing fulfilled many prophecies 
relative to his coming), we are compelled to admit 
that any argument founded upon the supposition that 
water was mentioned solely to indicate the character 
of the baptism for which the Christ came is completely 
overthrown, and those who wish to uphold the thought 
that Christ was baptized with earthly water must seek 
elsewhere for evidence wherewith to bolster up their 
tottering theory. 

How Was Christ Baptized? 

It is further held by these water worshipers that the 
mere statement that Christ came to John “to be bap¬ 
tized of him ” is conclusive proof that he came for the 
ordinary water baptism common to the law, with or in 
which it is supposed that John was baptizing. But in¬ 
asmuch as we have discovered that John’s baptism was 
not with earthly water, but was indeed nothing else 
than the water of divine power and healing, and that 
it so affected the hearts of the people as to cause them 
to repent and seek forgiveness of sins, and that they 
were by its operation prepared to believe on and 
receive the Christ and rejoice in him as their Messiah, 
therefore the statement that Christ was baptized under 
the administration of or through the agency of (u-6) 
John by no means proves that he was baptized with 


116 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


earthly water, inasmuch as John’s baptism was not of 
that character. Even if it were, the statement that 
Christ came to John “to he baptized of him” could by 
no means be held as carrying with it the thought that 
he must of necessity have received water baptism, un¬ 
less we are ready to admit that it also teaches that he 
came to receive the “baptism of repentance for the re¬ 
mission of sins,” which is specifically referred to as 
being John’s baptism. Since such belief is impossible, 
inasmuch as Christ himself declares that the Father 
had “sanctified and sent” him into the world (John 
10 ;36), and since it is declared of him that he was 
“holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners” 
^Heb. 7 : 26), “who did no sin, neither was guile found 
in his mouth” (I. Pet. 2:22), we are forced to the con¬ 
clusion that Christ could not have received a baptism 
of that character. 

If, then, the statement that Christ came to John “to 
be baptized of him ” does not carry with it the thought 
that he received the baptism which is specifically desig¬ 
nated John’s baptism, by what process of reason or 
logic can it be shown that he must of necessity have 
received a water baptism? If, in other words, the 
statement referred to furnishes us with no proof that 
Christ received the baptism of “repentance for the 
remission of sins,” then it certainly furnishes us with 
no proof that can be relied upon as determining the 
character of the baptism that he did receive. 

If, then, this matter is not to be determined from 
the statement quoted, we shall have to look elsewhere 
for evidence to prove the point. This, we shall find, is 
no difficult task, inasmuch as all Scripture agrees as 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


117 


to what transpired at this time, namely, that Christ 
was here anointed “with the Holy Ghost and with 
power,” which, as we have already seen, and as will be 
more abundantly made manifest as we proceed, is by 
all authorities held to be the highest possible form of 
baptism. There is, therefore, no evidence from any 
source whatever going to prove that Christ received a 
water baptism at the hands of John. 

“But John Forbade Him” 

But why insist so strenuously upon the thought 
that water baptism was the baptism for which Christ 
came to John? Was there no other which it was 
possible for him to receive ? Are we compelled to 
believe that Christ received a baptism which had no 
other import or significance than that he was previously 
a sinner and stood in need of moral renovation ? Was 
not the mighty induement of the Holy Spirit^ which 
he received at this time, a sufficient fulfillment of the 
term baptize f We certainly have shown that it was. 

If, then, the common conception that John in his 
remark, “I have need to be baptized of thee, and 
comest thou to me ? ” intended to set forth his unwor¬ 
thiness to manipulate the sacred person of the Christ in 
or with earthly water, how much more truthfully could 
he have pleaded unworthiness when he understood 
that his part in this great event was, that for the time 
being he must pose before all Israel as the superior of 
the Christ, and in the eyes of the people assume an 
attitude that ill befitted the servant in the presence of 
the Master, especially when that Master was the Son 
of God. 


118 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


How insignificant, indeed, does water baptism be¬ 
come in comparison with this high and mighty thing 
which John was now called upon to perform, namely, 
to act as Heaven’s representative in the inauguration 
of the Christ. If Moses did “ exceedingly fear and 
quake” in the figurative or indefinite presence of God 
on Sinai’s mount, how much more might John fear 
and tremble in the immediate presence of this human 
embodiment of the Almighty ? And especially so, 
when he was to so act as presumably to confer dignity 
and honor upon the Son of God. 

The immediate duty of John now was to lay down 
all his own power and authority and official dignity as 
Heaven’s mighty representative on earth, divesting, yea, 
emptying, himself thereof, as no doubt he was required 
to do, thus publicly transferring to Christ his power 
and official authority, yea, laying it all down at the 
feet of him who had given it. Well may John have 
stood in awe before such a sacred task ; for while he 
had been the center of the Holy Ghost’s influence, and 
the agent through whom it had operated upon the 
minds and hearts of the people, baptizing them with 
the “baptism of repentance for the remission of sins,” 
this which he was now called upon to perform was of 
so high and transcendent a character in comparison 
that he may well have hesitated at the thought of his 
unworthiness to act even as the instrument through 
which it might be accomplished. But Christ’s remark, 
“ Suffer it to be so now : for thus it becometh us to ful¬ 
fill all righteousness,” calls John’s attention to the fact 
that his work and mission were by no means fulfilled 
until he had accomplished this task and witnessed be- 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 119 

fore all Israel to the fact that Jesus was the Christ, the 
Son of God. 

Through the influence of the Holy Ghost John had 
gathered all Israel to this place. What for? John 
himself declared it thus : “That He should he made 
manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with 
w r ater.” In other words, this was the supreme moment 
of John’s present ministry. To fail now would indeed 
he a failure to “fulfill all righteousness” on his part. 

But Christ’s remark, “It becometh us to fulfill all 
righteousness,” calls John back to a sense of his duty, 
and makes clear to him that his work and mission 
were by no means “fulfilled” until, as the messenger 
and forerunner of the Messiah, he had in the name of 
High Heaven inaugurated Christ, God’s representative 
on earth, which, perhaps for the first time, John 
understood included this investiture of the Christ with 
the mighty Spirit of God. How well might John 
have shrunk from such a high and sacred duty as this 
standing between God Almighty and his only Son 
Christ Jesus and assuming to add dignity and im¬ 
portance to Christ. All of this, however, must be 
accomplished. Hence John yielded, or, as it is trans¬ 
lated, “then he suffered him.” And thus Christ was 
inaugurated into his sacred office, and thus was he 
made manifest to Israel through the agency of John. 

What could be more fitting, I ask, than that he 
should receive in the sight of all Israel the conferment 
of that which had “ filled ” John and prepared him for 
his mission and work, namely, the Holy Spirit of God, 
which was here transferred from John to Christ? and 
what more fitting than that he who had been Christ’s 


120 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


chosen forerunner and messenger, this greatest among 
the prophets, yea, greatest born of women, should have 
been selected for the high honor of being the human 
instrument through which this high and holy anoint¬ 
ing and consecration should be made? 

Elijah, who reared up “the altar of God” which had 
been broken down, when on Carmel’s summit he so 
faithfully stood as God’s representative to call Israel 
back from their idolatry, and the priests of Baal and 
all Israel were made to know that the God of Abraham, 
Isaac, and Jacob, “the God that answereth by fire,” 
w r as still the God of heaven, and w T ere made to declare 
for God (“The Lord, he is the God”), conferred a 
“ double portion ” of his spirit upon his servant Elisha 
at this very spot in centuries gone by. (II. Kings 2 : 
4-16.) This was undoubtedly another figure referring 
to the scene which was now being enacted ; for we 
must always remember that the spirit which dwelt in 
Elijah was the same that John the Baptist w T as pos¬ 
sessed of, and that he was indeed the Elijah which was 
to come. (Mai. 4 :5, repeated by Christ himself in 
Matt. 11 : 7-14.) 

This figure of the olden times, I say, was here and 
now having its exact and complete fulfillment. As we 
see John emptying himself of the Holy Ghost and all 
else incident to the high and sacred position which up 
to this moment he had filled as the chosen messenger 
of God, “Heaven’s high priest,” and in addition to 
this see the heavens open and witness the accompanying 
tokens, we begin to realize that Christ the Son (Elisha) 
is indeed receiving from the hands of God the Father 
(Elijah) a “double portion” of the Holy Spirit. This 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


121 


same matter is again referred to in figure in the matter 
of Joseph and his brethren in the land of Egypt, when 
Benjamin received the larger portion at the hands of 
Joseph. 

All of this must be conceded to be a more princely 
inauguration than subscription to, or the carrying out 
of, any rite or ceremony common to the old ceremonial 
law. If any outward manifestation was at all neces¬ 
sary in order that Christ might have a fitting inaugu¬ 
ration, and if any human instrumentality was deemed 
by God the Father as desirable, surely John was the 
most fitting instrument, and this wondrous induement 
of the Holy Spirit the most fitting token, that Heaven 
itself could have employed to bear testimony to the 
Messiahship of Christ or to make him “manifest to 
Israel.” Certainly the scene is in no way detracted 
from when we conceive that the Holy Ghost, instead 
of earthly water baptism, was that holy induement for 
which the Christ came, and which was conferred upon 
him through the agency of John, the mightiest repre¬ 
sentative of God that the earth had ever witnessed, up 
to this time, but whose power and authority and 
greatness were to be made to pale before the tran¬ 
scendent brightness of the Son of God, the “latchet of 
whose shoes,” John declares, “I am not worthy to 
stoop down and unloose.” 

Does it not appear marvelous that, notwithstanding 
John thus in this scene transmits to and confers upon 
the Christ all the power and influence of the Holy Ghost 
with which he is indued, and notwithstanding after 
this mighty induement, which represents the fullness 
of John’s capacity, we yet see the heavens opened and 


122 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


a “double portion” of the Spirit descend and rest upon 
the Christ, thus completely filling him, so that he is 
truthfully said to have received the Spirit without 
measure (thus being baptized therewith, and thus also 
completely fulfilling the statement “to be baptized of 
him ”), we yet allow this high and sacred investiture and 
inauguration to be lost sight of and set aside, and con¬ 
tent ourselves with the conception that the Christ re¬ 
ceived a baptism of water, which could only signify 
that he was previously morally defiled and stood in 
need of spiritual renovation ? No; the baptism for 
which he came was not that of earthly water, or of 
“repentance,” but was, as we have seen that it was, 
this conferment of divine authority and power through 
the agency of John the Baptist as Heaven’s representa¬ 
tive, chosen to thus inaugurate the Christ into his high 
and sacred office, all of which, including the pouring 
out of the Holy Ghost upon him, is most fittingly 
termed baptism. 

Allow me to illustrate: A President of the United 
States is chosen by the people. Until his inaugura¬ 
tion, he is but a private citizen. When is he made 
President in fact? When he stands before the Chief 
Justice, who, in the name of and representing the gov¬ 
ernment of the United States, confers upon him the 
dignity and honors pertaining to said office. How 
does the Chief Justice do this? Simply by word of 
mouth, and in the name of the government which he 
represents. Thus, I say, did John the Baptist do. 
Representing as he did the government of Heaven, he 
conferred upon the Christ, in the name of the govern¬ 
ment which he represented, all the rights, dignity, and 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 123 

power therein vested. Hence Christ was able to say, 
“ All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth,” 
etc. Peter could also declare, “God anointed Jesus of 
Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power,” and 
Paul could say, “ There ariseth another Priest, who is 
made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but 
after the power of an endless life [namely, the Holy 
Ghost].” 

That all of this is included in the declaration that 
Jesus came to John “to be baptized of him” is there¬ 
fore most manifest. And thus not only is the highest 
conception of human reason as to that which would be 
befitting the inauguration of the Christ fulfilled, but 
the highest possible significance inhering in the term 
PanTi^uj here finds its complete realization. 

Priestly Induction. 

But those who seek to uphold the theory that Christ 
was baptized with water , and who yet see the impossi¬ 
bility of Christ, who was pure and holy, having re¬ 
ceived a baptism which signified that he was impure 
and unholy, have abandoned that as an argument, and 
have shifted their whole base, so to speak, and reject 
the thought that Christ was baptized for any such pur¬ 
pose. He did not, say they, receive John’s baptism, 
namely, that of “repentance for the remission of sins,” 
but he received water baptism nevertheless, inasmuch 
as, being now thirty years of age, and about to enter 
upon his priestly office, he must be ordained thereto 
according to the provisions of the old Jewish ceremo¬ 
nial law in such cases made and provided ; and as the 
old law required that all priests should be initiated into 


124 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


office through the administration of water baptism, 
together with other ceremonies laid down in the law, 
Christ must of necessity submit himself to this time- 
honored rite as therein specified, and this was what he 
referred to when he made the remark to John, “Suffer 
it to be so now : for thus it becometh us to fulfill all 
righteousness.” 

But this is certainly as unfortunate and fully as 
impossible a theory as that Christ was baptized with 
John’s “baptism of repentance for the remission of 
sins.” First, because by no possibility could all right¬ 
eousness have been fulfilled through merely submitting 
to water baptism, inasmuch as water baptism was, 
even as the advocates thereof declare in this argument, 
a marked feature of the old law, and Paul declares in 
Galatians 3 : 21, “For if there had been a law given 
which could have given life, verily righteousness 
should have been by the law.” And in Hebrews 7 :18 
he declares that the old law was disannulled, “for the 
weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law 
made nothing perfect,” etc. To say that Christ, or 
John, could have fulfilled “all righteousness” by ful¬ 
filling the old law, which Paul says was weak and 
unprofitable, is certainly controverting the truth of 
Scripture, and is therefore a gross misrepresentation of 
the thought and utterance of Christ. 

Second, the argument that Christ was about to enter 
upon the office of priesthood, and must hence have 
received water baptism in fulfillment of the law in 
such cases made and provided, is without foundation 
either in reason or Scripture, as Paul most thoroughly 
makes manifest Hebrews 7: 11-19: “If therefore 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


125 


perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under 
it the people received the law,) what further need was 
there that another priest should rise after the order of 
Melchizedec, and not be called after the order of 
Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is 
made of necessity a change also of the law. For he 
of whom these things are spoken [that is, Christ] per- 
taineth to another tribe, of which no man gave 
attendance at the altar. For it is evident that our 
Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses 
spake nothing concerning priesthood. And it is yet 
far more evident: for that after the similitude of 
Melchizedec there ariseth another Priest, who is made 
[now mark], not after the law of a carnal commandment , 
but after the power of an endless life. ... For there 
is verily a disannulling of the commandment going 
before [or, of the previous law. Why?], for the weak¬ 
ness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made 
nothing perfect; but the bringing in of a better hope 
did : by the which we draw nigh unto God. ...(.. 
The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a Priest 
forever after the order of Melchizedec).” 

I contend that this Scripture forever precludes and 
renders impossible the thought that Christ was bap¬ 
tized with water, inasmuch as water baptism was a 
prominent feature of this same law of “a carnal com¬ 
mandment” under which the Levitical priesthood was 
perpetuated, and which law Paul says was changed in 
the inauguration of Christ—disannulled, indeed. He 
declares most emphatically that Christ was not made 
a priest after the manner or custom of the law, but 
“ after the power of an endless life.” So if water bap- 



126 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


tism was one of the ordinances, or carnal command¬ 
ments, through the performance of which a man of the 
tribe of Levi was inducted into the priestly office (and it 
was; see Ex. 28 and 29, especially 29), then by 
no possibility could Christ have been thus set apart to 
his office and work, or else Paul was entirely mis¬ 
taken ; for he says most positively that Christ was not 
made a priest through the performance of any of these 
carnal ordinances embraced in the old law. 

What utter folly, also, is it to suppose that one par¬ 
ticular feature of the old law, namely, water baptism, 
was here engaged in by Christ, while all the other 
provisions thereof were ignored. How short-sighted 
and foolish is such a claim. There is just as much 
evidence that Christ clothed himself in all the habili¬ 
ments of the Aaronic priesthood, and that he submitted 
himself to all the forms and ceremonies incident to the 
old law as recorded in the twenty-eighth and twenty- 
ninth chapters of Exodus, as there is that he was 
baptized with water. Paul states that nothing of the 
kind occurred, and that the “power of an endless life” 
was invoked, which we know is the Holy Ghost, because 
it was in this “power of the Spirit” that he returned 
“into Galilee” after his baptism. We also learn the 
same thing from Peter, in Acts 10 : 38 : “ How God 
anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and 
with power,” etc. Christ also said to his disciples that 
they should tarry in Jerusalem until they should be 
indued with power : “ But ye shall receive power, after 
that the Holy Ghost is come upon you” (Acts 1:8). 

It is easy in the light of these passages to understand 
what Paul means when he says that Christ was not 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


127 


made a priest “after the law of a carnal command¬ 
ment” (such as water baptism, or other ceremonial 
rites or observances contained in the old law), but 
“after the power of an endless life,” namely, by the 
Holy Spirit of God. It was because of this Holy 
Ghost baptism that Christ was able to say, “ The 
Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed 
me,” etc. 

The fact is, that even the old law and all precedent 
would have been outraged by the attempt to usher 
Christ, who was of the tribe of Judah, into the office of 
the Levitical priesthood. Such a thought is at vari¬ 
ance with all Scripture truth upon the subject, and is 
hence impossible. The very fact that water baptism 
was an ordinance of the old law, to be engaged in by 
those who were about to enter upon the Levitical 
priesthood, is the one fact above all others which pre¬ 
cludes the possibility of Christ’s having been baptized 
with water, from the simple fact that Paul declares 
that Christ, in entering upon his office as man’s great 
High Priest submitted himself to no law of carnal 
commandments or ordinances such as were imposed 
under the old law upon the Levitical priesthood. 

It seems amazing that the advocates of water 
baptism should not have discovered that the fact that 
water baptism is an essential feature of the old law 
is the one fact which forever renders the baptism of 
the Christ with water an utter impossibility. We 
hold that this argument is impregnable and unanswer¬ 
able, and we challenge any man to successfully assail 
it. We therefore add it to those already adduced, each 
and all of which prove the same fact. It does not 


128 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


seem possible that any honest, candid mind, not 
controlled by prejudice, could reject such a showing. 

But this is, after all, no more wonderful than is the 
fact that, notwithstanding we see the heavens opened 
and the Spirit descending upon the Christ, which by 
all Scripture is designated baptism, we yet will not 
accept this high and holy influence and power as the 
true baptism for which he came, but that we throw to 
the winds all reason, logic, common sense, Scripture 
authority, and every other consideration, and will not 
be satisfied until we have so bent and warped the 
language in which this story is told as to make it 
appear that the baptism expected and received by the 
Christ, which was to fit him for his mission of baptiz¬ 
ing and saving humanity, was, after all, nothing more 
than the ordinary water baptism incident to the times, 
which was always expressive of previous moral 
defilement and a desire to be cleansed therefrom. I 
repeat that this is amazing,—amazing ignorance, amaz¬ 
ing superstition, amazing blasphemy,—and has already 
resulted in dragging untold millions down to death by 
causing their minds and hearts to be turned away from 
the “Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the 
w T orld,” and from the Holy Spirit, which alone is the 
sanctifier and baptizer of mankind, and by causing 
them to receive with favor and consideration an 
outward, man-ordained ordinance, heathen and Juda- 
istic in origin, which can by no means “take away 
sins” or “make the comers thereunto perfect,” and 
wdiieh for this very reason was disannulled by God, as 
says Paul. 

Had there been any law, any type, figure, or represen- 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


129 


tation contained either in the Law, or in the Prophets, 
or in the Psalms that would have had its fulfillment in 
Christ’s being baptized in or with water at this partic¬ 
ular time, then such baptism must have taken place 
though the heavens would have been shaken thereby ; 
for he himself said, “Till heaven and earth pass, one 
jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law, till 
all be fulfilled.” Elsewhere, also, he declared that all 
things written in the Law, and in the Prophets, and in 
the Psalms concerning him should have their complete 
and exact fulfillment in him, whether these utterances 
related to literal or spiritual things. We hence find a 
statement similar to this continually recurring in the 
New Testament: This was done “that the Scripture 
might be fulfilled.” But certainly it is not legitimate 
argument to set up the necessity of the Christ’s being 
baptized with water in order to fulfill the law or the 
prophecies, when neither in the one nor the other, nor 
elsewhere in the old Scriptures, can there be found a 
whisper or hint even that such a thing as water bap¬ 
tism was to occur in the case of Christ—no law, no 
type, no shadow, no representation, nothing. How 
weak and silly is it, then, to insist that w r ater baptism 
must have occurred. 

Let those who insist that Christ must have been 
baptized with water in order to fulfill the law, or the 
prophecies, or any declaration of Scripture elsewhere 
given, produce the passage in which these statements 
are set forth, and we will give up the argument and 
retire therefrom as gracefully as may be. But uptil a 
“ Thus saitli the Lord ” can be produced, let this hoary 
idol to which the church has been bowing down 


130 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


through the centuries past, and to which divine 
honors, powers, and prerogatives have been ascribed, 
be thrust out of the seat of the Holy Ghost which it 
has usurped, through the connivance of the devil work¬ 
ing through the darkened conception of unspiritual 
men, to the everlasting undoing of multitudes of the 
children of men who might otherwise have found sal¬ 
vation through Jesus Christ. 

Two Horns to the Dilemma. 

But there are those who, while acknowledging 
that Christ did not receive John’s baptism, nor yet the 
baptism of water incident to “priestly induction,” still 
insist that water baptism must have been engaged in 
by the Christ at this time in order that the old law 
might be fulfilled by him, not as the Christ, but as a 
Jew; for the law was as binding upon him as upon 
any other of the Jewish people. 

Let us for a moment examine this proposition. In 
the first place, we see that the argument rests upon the 
proposition that the law especially enjoined water bap¬ 
tism upon the Jews. Now, this is the very proposition 
that is denied by the advocates of water baptism. 
Water baptism had no part or place under the old law, 
say they, but was introduced by John and perpetuated 
under the Christian dispensation by the authority of 
Christ and his apostles. 

Now, whichever horn of this dilemma our water 
advocates take, the end is utter disaster to their theory 
of the water baptism of the Christ. If there was a law 
of this character which demanded water baptism for 
all the Jews, then the Christ, who was no doubt reared 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 


131 


as a Jew, must have often engaged therein; for it is 
definitely stated that he was subject unto his parents, 
who no doubt were faithful to all the provision^ and 
requirements of the old law, and hence would rear 
their son to conform strictly to the same. So that if to 
fulfill the law was to engage in water baptism, nothing 
further could be required of him in that regard, unless 
the law itself demanded the repetition of the rite at this 
specific time and place. Was there such a law? If 
so, let the advocates of the water baptism of the Christ 
at this particular time point it out; for, as we have 
said, there is just as much of presumptive evidence that 
all the other provisions of the law were here reengaged 
in as that water baptism was, and that anything of that 
character was engaged in will not be claimed by any 
person of any intelligence whatever. 

The other horn of this dilemma which is presented 
to the water advocates is the denial that water baptism 
as a religious rite had any part or place under the old 
dispensation; in which case, of course, there would be 
found neither law nor precedent upon which to predi¬ 
cate the fact of his baptism in or with water at all, and 
therefore the whole argument would rest upon the 
mere assumption that the baptism for which he is said 
to have come to John was a water baptism—a state¬ 
ment which has already been shown to be without 
support either in reason or Scripture, and which both 
of these authorities render entirely impossible. 

But if our water friends still insist that as a Jew 
Christ engaged in the ordinance of water baptism, and 
that therefore the same rests as a duty obligatory upon 
his followers for all time, by what rule of logic can 


132 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


they consistently exempt themselves from engaging in 
it as often as did he, which, if at all, was no doubt 
thousands of times, according to the law and the uni¬ 
versal custom of his people? (Mark 7 : 4.) Or, if this 
particular feature of the old law is to be retained as a 
practice binding upon the church to-day, by what au¬ 
thority do we discard all the other features of the old 
law,— circumcision, the eating of the Paschal supper, 
etc.? Can such peculiar unfaithfulness as to these 
things on the part of our water friends be accounted 
for? For while it must be admitted that Christ bap¬ 
tized himself thousands of times in or with water (if 
at all), most Christians content themselves with being 
baptized with water once in a lifetime, and as for all 
the other features of the law, which Christ no doubt 
engaged in, they entirely ignore them. 

How, I again ask, can such inconsistency be 
accounted for? or how can the matter of the water 
baptism of the Christ be urged as being absolutely 
necessary in compliance with the requirements of the 
old law, and to fulfill and forever end the same ? Why 
not insist that all the provisions of said law must here 
be repeated? By what rule of logic or argument do 
we select out one feature of said law, namely, water 
baptism, and insist on its repetition upon this occasion 
in order that the old law should be satisfied in this 
particular, while all the other provisions of said law 
are allowed to be ignored, and no thought of their 
being repeated at this time by Christ is even for a 
single moment indulged in? Why, I ask, must 
water baptism of necessity be engaged in by Christ 
as a Jew at this supreme moment, while all else 


THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST 133 

pertaining to the law is repudiated? Let some one 
explain. 

The fact is, that Christ was not prepared for his high 
and sacred mission through the performance of any 
outward ceremony or ordinance, but by the baptism 
of the Holy Ghost, or, as Paul puts it, “not after the 
law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of 
an endless life,” and no man can truthfully assert the 
contrary, or show a single reason, either scriptural or 
otherwise, why water baptism should have been sub¬ 
mitted to or engaged in by the Christ at this time. I 
hereby challenge any man to produce such evidence. 


CHAPTER V 
CHRIST’S FIRST MIRACLE 

We now come to the time when Christ, haying been 
fully prepared for his great work and mission by the 
baptism of the Holy Ghost, as we have seen, at once 
enters upon the same, and after his forty days’ struggle 
with the tempter we find him returning into Galilee in 
the “power of the Spirit,” with which he had been so 
mightily indued upon the banks of the Jordan. We 
may expect to find in his words and acts clear indica¬ 
tions of that wdiich he held as being the fulfillment of 
all prophecy regarding him, whether made by John or 
others; for we find that he was exceedingly careful 
that all things spoken by Moses, or the prophets, or in 
the Psalms concerning him should have their exact 
fulfillment in him. He who at the age of twelve w T as 
anxious to enter at once upon his “Father’s business” 
will not now be found neglecting the same ; and as his 
business, according to all prophecy, was to heal, cleanse , 
purify, baptize, we shall be able to determine the 
significance of these words by carefully noting the 
character of the work which engages his attention, for 
certainly, as we have said, his daily life, conduct, and 
work will be an exact fulfillment of that which it was 
prophesied it should be. 

Although his “hour is not yet [fully] come” in 
which “all nations” are to be baptized by his Spirit, 

134 


Christ’s first miracle 


135 


yet he himself is mightily indued therewith, and is 
able at least to cleanse all who come to him for that 
purpose. Hence we see him besieged from day to day 
by an eager, anxious throng of earth’s impotent 
ones, and it is said of such as came to him that he 
healed them all. Well might John say, in view of 
this mighty cleansing (to say nothing of that which 
was yet to be accomplished in the future, when all his 
followers should be filled with his Spirit), “ I indeed 
baptize [purify] you with water . . . : but ... he 
shall baptize [purify] you with the Holy Ghost, and 
w r ith fire.” Truly it was by the “finger of God” that 
he operated. 


WATER BAPTISM REPEALED. 

The first direct act of Christ after the temptation 
is recorded in these words : “ And the third day there 
was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother 
of Jesus was there : and both Jesus was called, and his 
disciples,” etc. (John 2:1, 2). That the great sig¬ 
nificance of this first miracle of Christ has not at all 
been apprehended by the church, is manifest. That 
Christ’s work should have been inaugurated under the 
parable of a wedding feast, is in itself significant; for 
while there is no doubt that a real, marriage w r as here 
celebrated, this was of but slight importance as com¬ 
pared with the great union which was at the same 
time consummated. Here the old and the new dis¬ 
pensations joined hands and stood up, so to speak, 
before Heaven’s altar, and were joined together in holy 
bonds of wedlock, never to be broken, Jesus Christ 
himself, the “Priest of the most high God,” officiating. 


136 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


Here was realized the joy of the bride who for cen¬ 
turies had awaited the coming of the Bridegroom, 
whom, though never having seen (after the custom of 
Eastern marriages), she yet loved ; whom, notwithstand¬ 
ing the whole matter had been arranged without her 
previous knowledge or consent, yet her heart had 
always and ever longed for ; who was, as she could now 
well discern, the “chiefest among ten thousand” and 
the one “altogether lovely.” Here Judaism and 
Christianity were united, and sat around one common 
festal board. Or, following the figure as it rapidly 
changes, “the mother of Jesus was there.” Moses, the 
prophets, the fathers, were here all represented. But 
one thing was lacking to make the occasion a happy 
and joyous one. This important lack is referred to 
thus : “And when they wanted wine, the mother of 
Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.” How 
exactly does this statement reveal the spiritual condi¬ 
tions then obtaining; for we must not forget that this 
as fully represents a spiritual truth as does the parable 
of the rich man and Lazarus, or any other parable, 
whether spoken by the Lord or shadowed forth in 
action. 

The reply of Jesus to his mother when she informed 
him that they had no wine is also significant, inasmuch 
as it declares the fact that his “hour” was “not yet 
come.” This expression is oft repeated, and was in a 
certain sense synonymous with that other Scripture 
statement, that the Spirit (or, the wine of the Spirit) 
was not yet poured out “because that Jesus was not 
yet glorified.” 

Mary, in the statement, “They have no wine,” 



[jJIIII-llQ 




CHRIST AT CANA. 


136 



























































































































































CHRISTS FIRST MIRACLE 


137 


represented the awful condition of spiritual destitution 
then prevalent. Christ’s reply, “Mine hour is not yet 
come,” sets forth the fact that until his hour of glori¬ 
fication through the resurrection from the dead came, 
these conditions could not be changed. But at once 
he does that which is a prophecy of what would be 
when that hour should have fully come. This was all 
set forth in the remark of the governor of the feast, 
“ Thou hast kept the good wine until now.” This 
remark truthfully represented the better conditions 
which were to obtain under Christianity, as in contrast 
with spiritual conditions previously prevalent, in 
which the wine of God’s truth was not only so watered, 
but foully adulterated, with rabbinical teachings and 
human “traditions” as to make the “word of God of 
none effect.” 

Not only in this miracle did he foreshadow coming 
spiritual conditions, but his wondrous activity in the 
interest of humanity all through his ministry was 
a fitting prophecy of all that mighty energy to be dis¬ 
played under the new dispensation, when the wine of 
God’s grace should freely flow, yea, be abundantly 
poured out, as says Joel, “upon all flesh,” which 
prophecy was to be fulfilled in the near future, and 
the stream was to rise, and rise, and still further rise, 
until the dry land should become a pool and the 
thirsty land springs of water, and was to flow on and 
on, rising higher and still higher, until righteousness 
should cover the earth as the waters cover the sea, 
yea, mounting up until the tops of the highest moun¬ 
tains of sin and evil should disappear, covered, 
completely submerged, immersed, baptized, in the 


138 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


purifying grace of God, the water of life, the wine of 
the kingdom. 

That wine represents the fullness of the Spirit and 
grace of God, is abundantly manifest in Scripture, one 
passage of which I will quote, as setting forth the same 
truth portrayed in the miracle under discussion, 
namely, Isaiah 25:6: “ And in this mountain shall 
the Lord of hosts make unto all people a feast of fat 
things, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full of 
marrow, of wines on the lees well refined.” 

This definite and very expressive prophecy was 
about to be fulfilled. The world was even now enter¬ 
ing upon its fulfillment. But as yet spiritual condi¬ 
tions were most fittingly represented by the “six water- 
pots of stone” which “after the manner of the purify¬ 
ing [baptism] of the Jews,” had been provided and 
were at hand ready for use, for at such a time the 
means by which the guests might religiously purify 
themselves must not be lacking. 

HOW THE PHARISEES BAPTIZED. 

In Mark 7 : 3, 4 it is declared that “the Pharisees, and 
all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not. 
. . . And when they come from the market, except 
they wash [/Sa^rcVwvrac], they eat not. And many other 
things there be w T hich they have received to hold, as 
the washing [pa-KTurnob^ of cups, and pots, brazen 
vessels, and of tables.” It will be observed that these 
Greek words rendered “wash” and “washing” respec¬ 
tively are but different forms of the word PanHZa), from 
which our word baptize comes. It is unfortunate that 
the translators did not use the words baptize and bap - 


Christ’s first miracle 


139 


tisms wherewith to translate these words instead of the 
words “ wash ” and “ washing,” which they did use. 
Few persons are aware that the passages refer to the 
Jewish custom of baptizing themselves with water be¬ 
fore eating, but nevertheless such is the case, and had 
the translators used the term baptize instead of “ wash” 
every one would have understood the matter, whereas, 
as it is, the truth taught is rendered obscure. 

This marriage feast, therefore, required religious 
purification ; for marriage with the Jews was and is a 
religious rite and feast, in which no Jew could at all 
participate unless the customary baptism had first been 
performed ; hence the “ six water-pots of stone.” That 
Jesus must have avoided this ceremony of water 
baptism on this as on other occasions, is manifest. 
Consistency would have demanded, yea, compelled, 
such a course, inasmuch as we find that both he and 
his disciples always repudiated these outward religious 
washings or baptisms, and that, too, in the most public 
manner, carrying their rejection of them to such an 
extent that the Pharisees became very much incensed 
on account of it. But while Jesus and his disciples 
did not engage in these outward water purifications, 
all the other guests were, no doubt, strict in their 
observance of them. Indeed, the six water-pots were 
there for this very purpose. 

It was after the guests had all been ceremonially 
baptized, or purified, through the use of this baptismal 
water, which had no doubt become somewhat depleted 
in the process of the purification of the people, that 
the Master ordered the water-pots to be replenished, 
“and they filled them up to the brim.” Mark the 


140 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


statement, “to the brim.” No more room for water. 
Water had had its day. It had filled its place in 
shadowing forth the great and ultimate baptism of 
Christ, but its day had now drawn to a close. Its sun 
was fast setting, for he whom it typified was even now 
about to speak it forever out of existence, and here in 
this his very first miracle to authoritatively set it aside 
as having fulfilled its day and mission, and henceforth 
it was to be superseded by, transformed into, that to 
w T hich through all the ages it had pointed, namely, the 
baptism of Christ. 

The time had now come when the Scripture truth 
was to be declared, that “the spirit, and the water, 
and the blood . . . agree in one.” That One was now 
come, and was here present, and stood ready in this 
his first parable in miracle to authoritatively claim 
his rightful prerogative and title, namely, to become 
“the end of the law for righteousness to every one that 
believeth.” “He that created the heavens, and 
stretched them out,” was now about to say to the 
waters, “ Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further; 
and here shall thy proud waves be stayed,” and he 
who bade Galilee’s swelling waters be still here 
spoke with equal authority, saying, “Draw out now, 
and bear unto the governor of the feast.” 

It was thus that the old , with all it stood for or 
represented, was by his mighty fiat merged into the 
new , under the figure of wine, which indeed “ maketh 
glad the heart of man.” It was this wine of the 
Spirit which Paul afterwards recommended to Timothy 
for his inward man (erroneously translated “stomach”) 
instead of the w T ater of “divers washings [baptisms], 


Christ’s first miracle 


141 


and carnal ordinances” so prevalent in those days, 
even as now, but which the same apostle said were 
only “imposed on them until the time of refor¬ 
mation.” 

The remark of the governor of the feast, “Thou 
hast kept the good wine until now,” is also prophetic. 
How much better, indeed, is the grace of God and the 
baptism of the Holy Ghost through the gospel, than 
the old dispensation with its types, shadows, and 
symbols, “divers washings [baptisms], and carnal 
ordinances,” which could never “take away sins” or 
“make the comers thereunto perfect.” Surely the new 
is better than the old, in that “the blood of Jesus 
Christ. . . cleanseth us from all sin.” 

“All old things now have passed away, 

They all in one combine,— 

The Spirit, water, and the blood, 

The corn, the oil, the wine.” 


CHAPTER VI 
CHRIST BAPTIZING 
HOW CHRIST BAPTIZED. 

The passages in which it is declared that Christ 
baptized are supposed by many to refer to and to sub¬ 
stantiate the fact that Christ baptized with or in earthly 
water. The passages referred to are these: John 3 : 
22 : “After these things came Jesus and his disciples 
into the land of Judea; and there he tarried with 
them, and baptized.” Also John 3 : 26 : “Behold, the 
same baptizeth,” etc. John 4:2: “Though Jesus him¬ 
self baptized not [or, none], but his disciples.” 

It will at once appear that there is in all of these 
nothing that can by any possibility be held as proving 
that the baptisms here spoken of were water baptisms. 
There is not the slightest hint even that water baptism 
was the baptism here talked about. He who finds 
water here must put it into the narrative himself. I 
suppose the real reason why water baptism is the thing 
here supposed to be referred to is that the state¬ 
ment that “John also was baptizing in iEnon near to 
Salim, because there was much water there” is 
recorded in the same connection. But a close scrutiny 
will reveal the fact that there is no connection what¬ 
ever between the two statements, notwithstanding they 
occur in the same passage. It is only necessary to 
remember what is a well-known and acknowledged 

142 


CHRIST BAPTIZING 























































































































































. 











• ' 



~ 






























■ 






CHRIST BAPTIZING 


143 


fact with all scholars, namely, that the Gospels do not 
pretend to give a consecutive history of the different 
events in the life of Christ according to their chrono¬ 
logical order. 

The fact is, that simple occurrences are often 
stated without any reference whatever to any other 
fact or statement. We have a wonderful exhibition 
of the truth of this in Luke 3: 15-22, where 
John’s being cast into prison is recorded as tran¬ 
spiring immediately after his reference to the coming 
and baptism of the Christ, while Christ’s coming and 
baptism are not recorded until after John is said to 
have been cast into prison, the record of Christ’s bap¬ 
tism being made in the twenty-first verse, while the 
record of John’s being cast into prison is in the twen¬ 
tieth verse. It requires but a moment’s thought to see 
that the two records, or the records of these two events, 
have nothing to do with each other. They each stand 
alone and separate. They are each simply a history 
of a certain occurrence, without any reference what¬ 
ever to their interdependence upon or relation to each 
other with regard to the time of their occurrence. 

As it is in this case, so it is in the one under con¬ 
sideration. The two incidents, namely, the coming of 
Christ and his disciples into the ,land of Judea and 
John’s “baptizing in iEnon near to Salim, because 
there was much water there,” have no more connection 
with each other than have Christ’s baptism and John’s 
being cast into prison. They are simple statements 
of separate and distinct facts and occurrences, which 
are in no way related to each other. Christ’s coming 
into the land of Judea here referred to was no doubt 


144 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


long after John was cast into prison, while John’s bap¬ 
tizing in iEnon near to Salim, in the very nature of 
things, must have transpired before he was cast into 
prison, even as did his baptism of Christ occur prior 
thereto, although Luke records it afterwards, as we 
have seen. 

That these baptisms in which Christ and his disci¬ 
ples are said to have engaged did not occur until after 
John’s ministry had closed, is most specifically declared 
by Peter in Acts 10 :37. In the same passage we also 
learn that Christ’s ministry commenced in Galilee, and 
not in Judea, whereas those baptisms spoken of are 
recorded after much is said about the sayings and 
doings of Christ in Jerusalem and elsewhere, which 
clearly shows, as we have said, that the record of the 
same cannot be held as being in chronological order. 

But were it proved that Christ and John were bap¬ 
tizing simultaneously at “ iEnon near to Salim,” even 
this could by no means be held as proof that they 
were engaged in baptizing the people in or with 
earthly water, since we have shown and will more 
abundantly show that John was not baptizing with 
earthly water, and if the presumption is that Christ 
and his disciples were baptizing with the same charac¬ 
ter of baptism as was John, then water is ruled out, 
because John is everywhere said to have preached the 
“baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.” 
That Christ also preached the baptism of repentance 
for the remission of sins, even as did John, is true, as 
we shall see from the scriptures below. That 
their baptisms were hence identical to this extent, is 
also true. That Christ at this stage of his ministry 


CHRIST BAPTIZING 


145 


added to his preaching * of “ repentance for the remis¬ 
sion of sins” bodily healing, is also true. This John 
had never done; for it is specifically declared that 
“John'did no miracles,” etc. That Christ did both 
preach and heal is declared, and that his disciples also 
shared in this work is distinctly stated ; hence both are 
most properly said to have baptized. 

The character of the baptisms occurring under 
Christ, and their identity with the baptism which John 
preached (in so far as it referred to the “baptism of 
repentance for the remission of sins”), are manifest from 
the scriptures below. It will be remembered that the 
full and complete baptism of Christ, namely, his own 
indwelling, did not occur until the day of Pentecost, 
and that therefore his present baptisms were limited, 
as was John’s, to this preparatory work. Not until 
Christ was “glorified” did he enter upon his full and 
ultimate mission of “thoroughly purging,” or baptizing, 
his disciples. 

The scriptures which prove the character of this 
preliminary baptism in which Christ spent his time 
are these : Mark 1 : 14, 15 : “Now after that John was 
put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the 
gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, The time 
is fulfilled, and the kingdom qf God is at hand: 
repent ye, and believe the gospel.” The same thing is 
declared in another form in Matthew 4 : 12-17 : “Now 
when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, 
he departed into Galilee. ... From that time Jesus 
began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom 
of heaven is at hand.” And also in Luke 4 : 14, 15 : 
“And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into 
10 


146 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


Galilee. . . . And he taught [or, preached] in their 
synagogues, being glorified of all.” 

We thus learn that the burden of John’s preaching 
and that of Christ’s was the same, namely, “ Repent: 
for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” But what¬ 
ever may be our conception of the true teaching in¬ 
hering in the passages here referred to, one thing is 
certain, and that is that they cannot be made the 
ground upon which to build up the theory of water 
baptism, w T ith reference either to John or to Christ. 

As surely as baptism was the result of the preaching 
and teaching of John, so surely was baptism the result 
of the preaching, teaching, and manifestation of the 
divine pow r er in Christ. The one was said to be ac¬ 
complished with water (iu udart ), the other was said to 
be with the more thorough purging with fire (nupi). 
That there is no evidence that the one was any more 
earthly than the other, must be conceded. 

The water with which John baptized was the same 
that Christ told Nicodemus was necessary, but not 
sufficient. Both were from above, as Christ most 
emphatically declares, “Ye must be born from above 
[marg.],” or, “anew” (R. V.). That the water with 
which John baptized was as surely from “above” as 
was the fire with which Christ was to more fully or 
“thoroughly purge” them, cannot wfith reason be 
denied. The same thought or argument that will 
prove the one divine will also prove the other not of 
earth. That they both affected the human heart and 
soul cannot be denied without outraging human reason 
as well as the word of God itself; and to say that 
earthly water had any such effect upon the human 


CHRIST BAPTIZING 


147 


soul as is attributed to the baptisms of both John and 
the Christ, is certainly a marvelous exhibition of human 
ignorance, prejudice, and superstition, not to be looked 
for or excused in this day of gospel light and privilege, 
especially since it is declared in Scripture that there is 
no other name, or force, or power, or influence through 
which we are to be saved except Christ. 

Now, it must be evident that if earthly water must 
be invoked, this statement is not true. Neither is 
Paul’s declaration that the Christian stands “ complete ” 
in Christ true, if anything else is to be lugged in as a 
“necessary” reinforcement thereto. 

The Holy Ghost through the gospel presents Christ 
unto us. We have faith in him. We are justified in 
him. We are sanctified, redeemed, glorified, saved,— 
indeed, it is declared that we “live and move and 
have our being,” in him. But when we strike the 
question of baptism, to our surprise we are referred to 
an earthly element and ordinance, without which it is 
claimed there is no real, true baptism, notwithstanding 
the Bible is full of a baptism not of earth, but which 
is everywhere said to be effected by the Holy Ghost, 
through the gospel of Jesus Christ alone, the declara¬ 
tion being that there is but one baptism, and that all 
Christians are baptized by one Spirit (I. Cor. 12 : 13), 
not one word being said about earthly water. 

John’s message to christ. 

From this time forward Jesus prosecuted his work 
and mission with great earnestness, so that when John 
(now in prison) sent two of his disciples to Jesus 
asking him, “Art thou he that should come, or do we 


148 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


look for another ? ” they found him in the very midst 
of his work, healing the sick, cleansing the lepers, 
casting out devils, etc., and in order to satisfy John as 
to his being the Christ, Jesus sent back this message: 
“Go and show John again those things which ye do 
hear and see: the blind receive their sight, and the 
lame walk, the lepers are cleansed [baptized], and 
the deaf hear, the dead are raised up/ 7 etc., all of which 
seems to have satisfied John as to who the Prophet of 
Galilee was. And by this same token he also knew 
that his own mission was now over, that the great 
religious system known as Judaism had in fact come 
to an end, and that that for which all the types, shad¬ 
ows, forms, ceremonies, ordinances (water baptism 
included), had stood had now forever passed away, 
being swallowed up in the Christ, who was the great 
fulfillment of them all, and in whom all things per¬ 
taining to the ceremonial law had an end, even as says 
the Scripture, “The Law and the Prophets were [only] 
until John. 77 

It may appear strange to some—and if the concep¬ 
tion of those who believe that baptism refers to water 
is true, indeed it is strange—that, notwithstanding John 
heralded the Christ to the world as the great Baptizer, 
yet among the many evidences which the Master sent 
back to John by which he was to recognize the Christ, 
baptism was not one of them, unless, indeed, it is true 
that healing the sick, cleansing the leper, raising the 
dead, etc., were really baptism; which is surely the 
truth, even as we have seen in the cases of Naaman 
the Syrian and Nebuchadnezzar the king, who were 
both said to have been subjects of God’s miraculous 


CHRIST BAPTIZINC 


149 


healing, which was called baptism. But not one w T ord 
is said about water , nothing to indicate that he was 
dipping, plunging, sprinkling, or pouring any person. 
How very strange this would be if water baptism were * 
the important thing which some would have us believe 
it is ; how unaccountable, even. 

If water baptism was the baptism to which John 
and the prophets referred when they heralded the 
Christ to the world as the one who should baptize and 
“purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and 
silver,” then, indeed, it w T ould appear as though Jesus 
were neglecting his mission. Could this be true? 
Certainly not. It only proves what we have contended 
for, namely, that water baptism w r as not the thing re¬ 
ferred to as that at which the Christ spent his time. 

The whole matter admits of but one explanation, 
and that is that water was not in the mind of either 
John or the prophets in their reference to Christ’s work. 
Neither was it that in which Christ or his apostles ever 
engaged. That he was, however, continually engaged 
by word and act in cleansing , purifying , baptizing , heal- 
mg, all who came to him, is declared of him both in 
prophecy and in fact. That Christ’s baptism w T as and 
is not of water, hut of the Holy Ghost, is stated time 
and again in Scripture, and cannot he disputed without 
declaring God a liar and the Scriptures untrue. 


CHAPTER VII 
THE NEW BERTH 

Christ’s remark to ‘Nicodemus, “Ye must be born 
again [or, from above],” supplemented by the further 
utterance, “ Except a man be born of water and of the 
Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God,” is 
most generally interpreted as referring to or including 
baptism. Those who believe that it does, invariably 
make the water here spoken of refer to the earthly 
element, and hence they teach the necessity of being 
baptized in or with earthly water, failing to see the 
impossibility of the argument in that it proves too 
much ; for if baptism is the thing referred to or in¬ 
cluded in this statement, then the passage would justify 
this rendering : Except a man be baptized with water, 
etc., he cannot enter into the kingdom of God, or of 
heaven. 

Such a thought of God, or of the religion of Jesus 
Christ, is certainly not possible to any but the most 
ignorant and prejudiced of men. Certainly no broad¬ 
minded Christian, w T ho knows God, can bring himself 
to believe that such a statement ever emanated from 
the lips of the Master, when, as we shall see, he him¬ 
self, in the most public manner, repudiated water 
baptism and taught his disciples to do likewise. 

If this language referred to earthly water, it would 
forever render salvation impossible except where water 

150 


THE NEW BIRTH 


151 


baptism had been received; for that the language 
makes the water spoken of just as important a factor 
as the Spirit, cannot be truthfully denied. Such a 
doctrine would place God in the attitude of making 
the salvation of the human soul, which is by his own 
showing of such incalculable worth, to depend, not upon 
his grace, or upon the acceptance thereof by the soul, 
but upon the mere accident of water, and that, too, in 
the hands of those who might be careless or ignorant 
as to the necessity of its administration. But one 
Scripture illustration will suffice: The thief on the 
cross must be conceded to have been impure, unclean, 
unbaptized. If this language of Christ to Nicodemus 
is true, namely, “Except a man be born [baptized] of 
water .... he cannot enter into the kingdom of God,” 
then the thief on the cross was not saved, notwithstand¬ 
ing Christ’s assurance to him, “ This day shalt thou be 
with me in paradise.” Millions of instances of like char¬ 
acter could be cited, where salvation would be forfeited 
if baptism in or with earthly water were necessary, 
notwithstanding the soul has made its peace with God. 

BAPTISM AND THE NEW BIRTH IDENTICAL. 

It does not seem possible that any intelligent person 
could be brought to believe such an absurdity, and yet 
it is true that men are being excommunicated from 
so-called Christian denominations for teaching that 
earthly water baptism is not necessary to salvation. 
To say that God the Father would save in cases where 
water baptism is not possible, or where it was neglected 
by those in charge and responsible therefor, when 
Christ says, “Except a man be born of water ... he 


152 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


cannot enter into the kingdom of God,” is to make 
God a liar, provided earthly water is the thing talked 
about; yet to such straits are the advocates of water 
baptism driven. But there is no necessity for suppos¬ 
ing that because water is referred to it must of necessity 
be the .earthly element. On the contrary, as we have 
shown by the many passages quoted at the very com¬ 
mencement of the argument, water and the Holy Spirit 
are held as being the same. 

That the Holy Spirit of God and the “ water of life ” 
of which the Bible is ever speaking are identical, 
needs no proof other than the quotations referred to. 
It would be as erroneous to suppose that two separate 
and distinct operations or elements were here referred 
to, as it would be to suppose that John the Baptist 
referred to two separate and distinct operations when 
he said, “He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost 
and with fire.” Hence to be “born of water and of 
the Spirit,” if it refers to baptism at all (and I am 
inclined to believe that it does), means exactly the 
same as being baptized with John’s baptism and with 
the Holy Ghost and with fire. That it has no refer¬ 
ence to earthly water is certain. 

THE BAPTISM OF FIRE. 

That the “fire” here referred to by John was the 
fire of heaven, which was through all ages the visible 
token of God’s presence, is true, and it represented the 
truth that “our God is a consuming fire.” Hence the 
expressions, “the devouring fire,” “hailstones and coals 
of fire,” “unquenchable fire,” “the God that answereth 
by fire,” etc. These passages show that God’s presence 


THE NEW BIRTH 


153 


was indicated by fire, and hence fire and the Spirit are 
spoken of as one. But that this fire is not earthly fire 
will be conceded, for it was the significant emblem of 
the purifying presence and power of God, namely, the 
Holy Spirit. This will be clearly manifest as we look 
upon the altar reared by Cain and Abel, and behold 
the fire of heaven fall and consume the sacrifice of 
Abel, while that of Cain is untouched, God thus signi¬ 
fying that he had “ respect unto Abel and to his 
offering,” while Cain was rejected, proving that Abel 
was righteous and Cain unrighteous. 

It was the same fire of heaven which consumed the 
sacrifices of Noah, Abraham, Moses, Elijah, and 
Samuel, yea, which was all through the old dispensa¬ 
tion an abiding token of God’s presence, whether 
manifested on the blazing altar reared to his name on 
Moriah’s lonely top, or in Horeb’s “ burning bush,” or in 
the “cloudy pillar’s glow,” or on Sinai’s fire-crowned 
cap, or bn Pisgah’s lofty height, or on Carmel’s hoary 
summit, or in the “chariot of fire,” or in the “Urim 
and Thummim,” or in the Shekinah light over the 
mercy-seat, or as in pure and peaceful token it rested 
in dove-like form upon the Saviour’s brow, or as it rent 
in twain the temple veil, or shone above its towering 
pinnacle, or rocked dark Calvary’s summit, or sat in 
cloven tongues of flame upon the disciples on the day 
of Pentecost, where the old and the new embraced each 
other, the shadow and the substance, the figure and 
the thing figured, the former being merged into the 
latter, and the representation being forever lost and 
swallowed up in the presence and power of the thing 
represented. 


154 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


If the Shekinah light over the mercy-seat no longer 
burns and glows, if the burning bush is a thing of the 
past, if the fire of heaven no longer blazes in a vis¬ 
ible manner upon any earthly altar, and, especially, if 
the descent and work of the Holy Ghost in all its 
purifying, cleansing power upon the human heart is 
no longer to be represented by this outward token of 
the visible presence of God, and if all this has forever 
passed away, with all else that throughout all the ages 
of the past was representative of the Christian dispen¬ 
sation, by what process of reason or logic, or by what 
authority, scriptural or otherwise, can a claim be set 
up or maintained that water baptism alone, of all the 
significant tokens of the past, should still be perpetu¬ 
ated under the new dispensation as a visible sign of 
the purifying presence of the Divine Spirit in the 
human heart, without which said work is frustrated, 
and salvation rendered impossible? But with no 
argument worthy of the name, and with no authority 
invoked other than mere human tradition by which 
such an assumption can for a single moment be main¬ 
tained, is not the effort to fasten and perpetuate this 
thing upon the Christian church as an ordinance of 
divine appointment an act of sacrilege and blasphemy 
unparalleled ? 

HERESY HUNTERS. 

Yet notwithstanding this, there are, on this the 
eve of the twentieth century of the Christian era, both 
individuals and so-called Christian denominational 
bodies who are ready to anathematize, and persecute as 
a heretic, and debar from the gospel ministry any man 


THE NEW BIRTH 


155 


who dares to affirm that water baptism, in common with 
all the types and symbols, figures, and shadows of the 
past, has now lost its significance in the presence and 
power of the real and the true, namely, the baptism of 
Christ through the preaching of the gospel, backed by 
the mighty energies of the Divine Spirit. We never¬ 
theless assert and maintain, without the fear of truth¬ 
ful contradiction, that the water referred to in the 
passage, “ Except a man be born of water and of the 
Spirit,” does not refer to earthly water, but that, on 
the contrary, the water which is here spoken of, and 
which is in this passage so closely associated with the 
Spirit, is nothing less than the word of God which 
brings repentance, the living Jesus, of whom Peter 
says we are born, “not of corruptible seed, but of incor¬ 
ruptible, by the word of God, which livetli and abideth 
forever.” 

If there are those who are able to give a good and 
substantial argument, drawn from reason and Scripture, 
for the discontinuance of fire as a visible token of the 
presence and power of God (which token not only had 
its significant place in the old, but was by divine 
authority carried over for a time into the new dispen¬ 
sation), while at the same time giving a sensible 
reason for the continuance of wa(er baptism as an or¬ 
dinance in the Christian church indicative of, or sup¬ 
plementary to, the “washing of regeneration, and 
renewing of the Holy Ghost,” let them produce said 
reason and argument. We predict that such an 
attempt would be but a monumental exhibition of 
spiritual ignorance, superstition, and prejudice worthy 
only of a Jewish Pharisee of the olden time, or a con- 


156 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


ception only possible of being evolved into a creed 
statement which had its birth during the darkest hour 
of submerged Christianity, and which has been trans¬ 
mitted (as has many another error) as an inheritance 
to the church of to-day. Such errors must be met, and 
grappled with, and overthrown through the enlighten¬ 
ing influence of the gospel of Jesus Christ promulgated 
by men indued with the Spirit of the Master, and 
baptized with his baptism, even though in so doing 
they may be branded as “heretics” and their names 
“cast out as evil.” 


THE GOLDEN RULE. 

The Golden Rule, moreover, speaks contrary to such 
a course of action. This rule, according to both Christ 
and the apostles, is the fulfilling of all that is contained 
in the law, whether moral or ceremonial, and in it no 
hint is given that water baptism is an important 
feature thereof. We can prove neither our love to 
God nor our love to man through water baptism. No 
interest either of God or of humanity is served through 
its observance or perpetuation. On the contrary, I 
have shown that the highest and holiest interests of 
humanity are jeopardized thereby, inasmuch as many 
thousands are and have been led to base their hope of 
salvation upon the fact of their having been baptized 
with water, and to believe that hence they are safe 
according to the promise of Christ, namely, “He that 
believetli and is baptized shall be saved.” They, 
having been taught that the baptism here referred to 
is that of water, believe themselves to have fulfilled 
its provisions, notwithstanding they may be total 


THE NEW BIRTH 


157 


strangers to the regenerating work of the Spirit of 
God through the gospel, which alone is held in 
Scripture as fulfilling the command to be baptized, 
and consequently that upon which eternal life is 
predicated. 

And not only so, but we have shown that God is 
not honored, and hence not loved, in and through the 
observance of this so-called sacrament, and that there¬ 
fore the law is in no way fulfilled thereby; but that, 
on the contrary, the Holy Spirit of God is in and 
through this ordinance thrust into the background, 
and his holy name dishonored, and his work and 
office blasphemously usurped. No, the Golden Rule 
has no place within its ample folds for an ordinance 
which damns humanity and does discredit to God’s 
Holy Spirit through the usurpation of his most high 
and holy attributes and prerogatives, and which lays a 
snare in the pathway of the unwary by which they 
are lured to their eternal destruction. The Golden 
Rule and the law of outward ceremonial purifications 
are everlastingly at war. 


CHAPTER VIII 


CHRIST AND HIS DISCIPLES DISCARD WATER 
BAPTISM 

Mark 7:1-9: “Then came together unto him the 
Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from 
Jerusalem. And when they saw some of his disciples 
eat bread with defiled (that is to say, with unwashen 
[or, unpurified]) hands, they found fault. (For the 
Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash [reli¬ 
giously purify] their hands oft, eat not, holding the 
tradition of the elders. And when they come from 
the market, except they wash [/fojmVwvrar], they eat 
not. And many other things there be which they 
have received to hold, as the washing [/SaTm^ou?] of 
cups, and pots, brazen vessels, and of tables.) Then 
the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not 
thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, 
but eat bread with unwashen hands? He answered 
and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of 
you hypocrites, as it is written, This people lionoreth 
me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. 
Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for 
doctrines the commandments of men. For, laying 
aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition 
of men, as the washing \_/3a7TTt<T/j.ou$~\ of pots and cups: 
and many other such like things ye do. And he said 
unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of 

158 


CHRIST AND HIS DISCIPLES DISCARD WATER BAPTISM 159 

God, that ye may keep your own tradition [namely, 
water baptism, etc].” 

Also in Luke 11 : 37 et seq. we have another account 
of the Master’s repudiation of this Jewish ordinance of 
water baptism : “ And as he spake, a certain Pharisee 
besought him to dine with him : and he went in, and 
sat down to meat. And when the Pharisee saw it, he 
marveled that he had not first [^aTrriVr^, baptized] 
washed before dinner. And the Lord said unto 
him, Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of 
the cup and the platter; but your inward part is full 
of ravening and wickedness. [It will here be noticed 
that the cup and the platter are used interchange¬ 
ably with these to whom the Master was talking.] Ye 
fools. . . . But woe unto you,” etc. Luke 12:10: 
“But unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy 
Ghost it shall not be forgiven,” etc. 

It will be observed that this conduct on the part of 
the Pharisees in their observance of these water baptisms 
and outward carnal ordinances was now denominated 
by Christ blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. The 
thought is, that God through the mighty energy of 
his Holy Spirit was seeking to lead them up into the 
light. But they preferred their own traditions and 
righteousness to any truth of God, and rejected the in¬ 
fluence of the Spirit, and blasphemously spoke against 
the truth which God through his Son, and through the 
Holy Ghost, was seeking to impart to them. It was 
blasphemy then ; it is certainly no less so to-day. 

In Matthew 15 : 2-14 we have this same subject 
again referred to, thus: “Why do thy disciples trans¬ 
gress the tradition of the elders ? for they wash not 


160 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


their hands when they eat bread. But he answered 
and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the 
commandment of God by your tradition ? . . . Thus 
have ye made the commandment of God of none effect 
by your tradition. . . . But in vain do they worship 
me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. 
. . . Then came his disciples, and said unto him, 
Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after 
they heard this saying ? But he answered and said, 
Every plant, which my Heavenly Father hath not 
planted, shall be rooted up. Let them alone : they be 
blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the 
blind, both shall fall into the ditch \_p 60 uvov , pit, well, 
or cistern ].” And it matters but little that there may be 
“much water there,” namely, in these baptismal cisterns ; 
the situation remains unchanged. They will perish in 
them, even as said the Christ. 

The prophecy spoken so long ago by Jeremiah was 
even here and now having its complete fulfillment, 
namely, this: “ They have forsaken me, the fountain 
of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken 
cisterns, that can hold no water,” namely, the water 
of life. 

Jesus, the “fountain of the water of life,” had stood 
before these people. They had been urged, both by 
John the Baptist and by the Christ himself, to accept 
him, but they had rejected all his proffers of life and 
salvation, and finally said : “ Away with him, away 
with him, crucify him ”; “ His blood be on us, and on 
our children” ; “We know that God spake unto Moses : 
as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is” ; 
“Crucify him, crucify him.” Thus they rendered their 


CHRIST AND HIS DISCIPLES DISCARD WATER BAPTISM 161 

decision against the “water of life,” and contented 
themselves with Moses and the law of carnal ordi¬ 
nances which he had given them, namely, water baptism, 
etc., and they will perish therein, says Christ. 

A GRAPHIC PICTURE. 

“ If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the 
ditch.” 

This is the horrible picture drawn by the Master’s 
own hand to illustrate the lost condition of those who 
at that time were most diligent in the practice of water 
baptism; for we must not forget that water baptism 
was the subject under discussion when the Master 
uttered this condemnation. How fittingly does all 
this set forth the condition of the church to-day. 
What an awful water “ditch” have these “blind lead¬ 
ers” led the church into, with their unholy representa¬ 
tion that baptism refers to earthly water, until they 
have succeeded in turning the eyes and hearts of the 
people away from the “Lamb of God, which [alone] 
taketh away the sin of the world,”—him who alone is 
“the water of life,” and into whom alone we are to be 
baptized, and have by their everlasting clamor for 
earthly water so impressed its importance upon the 
common mind as to make its use and observance a 
condition of salvation. If this is not a sin greater 
than that of “Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made 
Israel to sin” in causing them to worship the “calves 
of gold ” rather than the “ God of heaven,” then every 
principle by which we may judge as to the enormity 
of sin is at fault. 

We see in all this how utterly impossible it would 
n 


162 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


have been for Christ himself to be baptized by John 
with earthly water, and then to condemn and repudiate 
its practice by others. He could not have done so. 
No; Christ came, the mighty fulfillment of all the 
types and shadows of the past, water baptism included, 
but neither in prophecy nor in its fulfillment is water 
baptism ever referred to as having a part or place 
under his administration. Moses, the Prophets, the 
Psalms, yea, the whole Book, is full of what he is to 
accomplish. And while this is all elaborated and set 
forth in such abundant fullness that language seems 
to be exhausted in the endeavor to properly represent 
his work and mission, yet not once is the subject of 
water baptism referred to, or even hinted at, as being 
among the important things to be performed either 
by himself or his followers. And as we have seen 
in our short investigation thus far, and as will be 
more abundantly manifest as we proceed, he never 
anywhere referred to the subject of water baptism 
except to repudiate and overthrow it. 

at Jacob’s well. 

It is true, not only that the Master sought to impress 
upon the minds of the disciples the uselessness of water 
baptism, both by precept and example, but that he 
sought to impress others with the same truth. The 
conversation with the woman of Samaria at Jacob’s 
well is but another effort upon the part of Christ to 
turn the eyes of the world away from water baptism. 
Jacob’s well was traditionally sacred. Its waters, 
drunk, or used for baptismal purposes, were as superior 
to ordinary water as was the Jordan, in the mind of a 


CHRIST AND HIS DISCIPLES DISCARD WATER BAPTISM 163 

Jew, more sacred than all other sacred rivers of the 
East. 

This woman of Samaria had come day after day to 
this well of Jacob, in the vain thought that its sacred 
waters would, as she drank of and purified herself 
with them, give eternal life. It was an idea gathered 
from her Judaistic and heathen ancestry (for the 
Samaritans, in both blood and religion, were an amal¬ 
gamation of these). 

One day when she came, as was her wont, no doubt 
tired and weary and perhaps with renewed desires for 
a higher life struggling in her soul, eternal life met 
her at the well in the person of Jesus Christ. They 
entered into conversation. She was talking of the water 
in the well. He was talking of water not of earth. 
In kindly, gentle language he sought to disabuse her 
mind and to draw her thought away from the water 
in the well to the “water of life” as found in himself. 
After a time he succeeded so thoroughly that the nar¬ 
rative declares that she “left [or, forgot] her water- 
pot” and went and called her friends—to come and 
get some of the sacred water in Jacob’s well ? no, but 
to “come, see a man which told me all things that 
ever I did: is not this the Christ?” 

Oh, that humanity might forsake the water in the 
well, the water in the creek, river, or cistern, and 
come to Christ for the “water of life,” and be baptized 
therein, and be saved, even as he has promised. 

bethesda’s pool. 

This same lesson is taught again, when Bethesda’s 
pool is made to set forth the mighty truth that healing, 


164 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


cleansing, salvation, is not to be had in earthly water, 
but in the “ Man of Galilee.” 

Around the 'pool were gathered the “impotent” 
ones of Israel, waiting, as others had waited all 
through the centuries, for the movement of the waters ; 
for, according to tradition, some day there should come 
an “angel” troubling the water. One day the angel 
came in the person of Jesus Christ, and did he say 
to one of these, Will you let me put you into the water? 
No; but through this man he taught all other men 
that healing, cleansing, salvation, lies not in Bethesda’s 
pool nor in any other earthly water, but in Jesus of 
Nazareth, and that he alone has “power on earth to 
forgive sins” and to “cleanse from all unrighteous¬ 
ness.” Oh, that all men might learn the same lesson, 
and that earth’s “impotent folk,” which these but 
represented, might be saved. 

THE WATER OF LIFE. 

But again we pass on, and we find him mid Israel’s 
millions as on the “last day, that great day of the 
feast,” they are commemorating that scene in the desert 
so long ago, when the smitten rock was made to send 
forth its life-giving streams until it was true to say 
that they “did all drink as says Paul, “of that 

spiritual Rock that followed them ; and that Rock was 
Christ.” It was as they were celebrating this scene 
which was to have its fulfillment in Christ, that it is 
declared: “In the last day, that great day of the 
feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, 
let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth 
on me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly 


CHRIST AND HIS DISCIPLES DISCARD WATER BAPTISM 165 

[inward parts] shall flow rivers of living water.” And 
for fear that some might wrest even this, as they 
do other scriptures, “unto their own destruction,” it is 
very carefully added, “ But this spake he of the Spirit, 
which they that believe on him should receive.” 

How amazing, in view of this scripture, that any 
person should fail to see that the water here emphasized 
must be the same as is elsewhere spoken of, of which 
all “must be born” and with which all must be 
“baptized.” Let it always be remembered that the 
Holy Ghost and “rivers of living w T ater” are but one 
and the same; so that if a person is baptized of the 
Holy Ghost he is really and truly baptized with water, 
not earthly but spiritual. 

THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS. 

How t strange it is that, notwithstanding all the efforts 
of the Master everywhere and under all circumstances 
to disabuse the minds of the people of the importance 
which they attached to these outward rites and ordi¬ 
nances and traditions, we yet find multitudes of people 
who, wdiile pitying the ignorance and superstition of 
those w T ho thought that there was saving virtue in 
Jacob’s well, and Bethesda’s pool, and Jordan’s w 7 aters, 
still tenaciously adhere to the old heathen and Romish 
idea that water baptism is necessary to salvation. In 
w 7 hat respect, I ask, do these two beliefs differ? In no 
respect. They both emanated from the same source, 
are perpetuated by the same ignorant and superstitious 
belief, and are equally foreign to the pure and sacred 
story of the gospel of Christ. I hold that it would be 
no more perversive of Scripture truth to declare that 


166 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


the water referred to in the story of the rich man and 
Lazarus was earthly water than it is to teach that the 
water of “regeneration” and of the “new birth” 
is earthly water, and that Scripture baptism contem¬ 
plates its use. 


CHAPTER IX 
THE GREAT COMMISSION 

We now come to the close of Christ’s life upon earth 
as lived in his own fleshly body. Gethsemane, the 
cross, and the tomb were now all ii>ast. Death, hell, 
and the grave had been vanquished. Captivity had 
been led captive, so far as his own person and body 
were concerned. But his real body, namely, his 
church, still remained to be resurrected. All this work 
still lay in the future, and was yet to be wrought out in 
time. The means thereto lay in himself and in the 
power of the divine inhering in him. This power, 
this mighty energy, seems during his life in the flesh 
to have been concentrated in his own proper person, in 
and through which his mighty works had been per¬ 
formed and his purposes accomplished. But the time 
had now come when the future carrying on of his 
work and mission was to be to a very large extent en¬ 
trusted to others. Hitherto he had dwelt in one 
specific fleshly body, to which he, seemed for the time 
being to be limited. But now he proposed to indwell 
and appropriate to his own use and service the entire 
person—soul, body, mind, will, and strength—of all 
those who would present themselves a willing, “ living 
sacrifice ” to do him service. All such were to be fitted 
for this service by the “ washing of regeneration, and 
renewing of the Holy Ghost,” called by him baptism. 

167 


168 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


Individual humanity was now to become a “ temple ” 
for his holy indwelling. Hence it is declared, “Ye are 
the temple of the living God.” Again, “Know ye not 
that ye are the temple of God. . . ? If any man defile 
the temple of God, him shall God destroy : for the 
temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.” “Your 
body is the temple of the Holy Ghost.” In this temple 
abide both the Father, and the Son, and the Holy 
Ghost. “ He shall give you another Comforter, that he 
may abide w T ith you forever; even the Spirit of truth ; 
... ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and 
shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I 
will come to you. ... Because I live, ye shall live 
also. At that day ye shall know that I am in my 
Father, and ye in me, and I in you. ... If a man 
love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will 
love him, and we will come unto him, and make our 
abode with him.” “I am the bread of life. ... If 
any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever. . . . 
He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, 
dwelleth in me, and I in him,” etc. 

All of these passages show very conclusively what 
Christ meant when he said to his disciples, as he was 
about to send them forth on their great mission, “Ye 
shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days 
hence.” “And, lo, I am with you alway, even unto 
the end of the world.” This baptism, this sanctifica¬ 
tion, this setting apart by the anointing of the Holy 
Ghost, was to be bestowed upon the disciples in order 
that they might be able to properly prosecute and 
carry on to a successful issue the great work so dear to 
the heart of Christ. 


Tomb of Mary. iViOT. NT OT OLXN E.*>. Garden rf Gcthsem.re inclosed 


























































































































































































































































































































' 























' * 

' 

■ 




























' 



















. 

* 






■ 





















■* 










' 



































THE GREAT COMMISSION 


169 


Christ’s work and mission in the world were, as say 
the Scriptures, “ not ... to condemn the world ; but 
that the world through him might be saved.” The 
world was, however, impure, unbaptized, and the utter¬ 
ance of the Father stood unrepealed and unrepealable, 
namely, “Without holiness no man shall see the Lord.” 
“The pure in heart [alone] . . . shall see God.” The 
world must, therefore, be made pure—baptized. This 
baptism could be accomplished only by the power of 
the Holy Ghost, the same “finger of God” which had 
sanctified the Christ and sent him forth into the world, 
and through the presence and power of which he 
accomplished his mighty works. This Holy Ghost, in 
all its mighty cleansing power, was now to be poured 
out upon the disciples, qualifying and sealing them to 
this God-given mission. 

The command was : “ Go ye into all the world, and 
preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth 
and is baptized shall be saved ; and he that believeth 
not shall be damned [condemned].” And as Christ 
was said to baptize with the Holy Ghost, they, of 
course, representing him, could have baptized with no 
other; for as the Holy Ghost descending and abiding 
upon the Christ was the token by which he was to be 
known as the Holy Ghost baptizer, so also the descent 
and abiding of the Holy Ghost upon the disciples was 
in like manner to proclaim the character of the bap¬ 
tism wherewith they were to baptize the nations. 
Indeed, Christ was very particular to tell them that 
the baptism which they were to receive was that of the 
Holy Ghost. That this is also what they expected is 
abundantly shown by their tarrying at Jerusalem, as 


170 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


they had been commanded to do, and their waiting, 
watching, and praying for the promised power instead 
of water baptism. 

THE PRAYER OF CHRIST. 

His prayer on their behalf, recorded in John 17, 
proves most conclusively the character of the baptism 
desired and held to be necessary : 11 Sanctify [baptize] 
them through thy truth : thy word is truth.” He else¬ 
where declares himself to be the “truth,” and he is 
declared to be the “Word” of God, yea, very God him¬ 
self; so that his prayer was, Sanctify them through 
me, “and for their sakes I sanctify myself. . . I in them, 
and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one. 
... I have declared unto them thy name. . . .; that 
the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in 
them, and I in them.” 

It does not seem possible to so mistake this language 
as to suppose that it could be fulfilled by the adminis¬ 
tration of earthly water. There is. nothing whatever 
to indicate that water baptism was the thing here being 
talked about, except in so far as it. was repudiated. 
The simple fact is, they were now to do Christ’s work, 
and they must be indued with Christ’s power. Christ 
was now to use all their ransomed powers in his 
service. He was to control every thought, word, pur¬ 
pose, desire, and act. They were to be able to say with 
Paul, “ I live ; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me ” ; and 
that it was God that worked in them “to will and to 
do of his good pleasure.” Christ’s language to man 
now Is, “ Behold, I stand at the door and knock : if any 
man . . . open the door, I will come in,” etc. His invi- 


THE GREAT COMMISSION 


171 


tation now is, “Son [or daughter], give me thine heart.” 
For what purpose? “That he might sanctify and 
cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,” or 
by “the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the 
Holy Ghost.” This was the baptism that the disciples 
were now to offer to the children of men, not in their 
own name, but “ in the name of the Father, and of the 
Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” 

The conditions upon which this baptism was offered, 
as we shall see, were faith, repentance, and gladness of 
reception thereof, as shown by “Repent ye therefore, 
and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, 
when the times of refreshing shall come from the pres¬ 
ence of the Lord,” the presence here referred to being 
this same indwelling Christ of which we have spoken, 
which again is equivalent to another Scripture truth, 
namely, that to have Christ formed within is the only 
“hope of glory.” This is the baptism which saves, 
and there is no other, even as the Scriptures declare. 

THE GOSPEL THE INSTRUMENT. 

To suppose that the baptism for which Christ gave 
his life in order that it might be conferred upon the 
children of men, and which he promised at this time 
to his disciples, and to the promulgation and bestow- 
ment of which he urges them to sacrifice everything 
which they hold dear, even to life itself, is anything 
less than full and complete salvation, is to charge God 
with foolishness. There is, indeed, awful guilt attached 
to such teaching, as is clearly evident in the barren 
spiritual condition of those who thus teach. 

The fact that the saying of Christ, namely, “He that 


172 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


believeth and is baptized shall be saved,” is not true 
when applied to water baptism, ought of itself to be 
sufficient evidence that water baptism was not that to 
which Christ referred in giving the commission ; for 
that all who are baptized with water are saved will not 
be affirmed, except by those most hopelessly deluded. 
But the statement must be true, hence another bap¬ 
tism, one which does save, must be the one referred 
to, namely, that of the Holy Ghost through the gospel. 

That nothing else than the gospel was committed to 
them is most definitely stated, not only in the commis¬ 
sion itself, but elsewhere, and that the gospel is the 
“power of God,” and hence sufficient, is declared. 

But was the gospel the only thing committed to 
their hands, the only instrument by which baptism 
was to be effected? Did he not say, Take a little 
water and go and sprinkle the nation's? or, Go and 
dip or immerse the nations in water? No, nothing of 
the kind, except as Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost 
are the water. What did he say ? This : “ Go ye into 

all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved,” etc. 
“Teach all nations, baptizing them [in or with water? 
Yea, verily] in [into] the name of the Father, and of 
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” namely, God, of 
whom we are said to be born, and of or into whom we 
are, or must be, baptized—God, the “water of life.” 

But does the gospel of the Son of God inform us 
of all this, and are we laid under the power of the 
gospel, which Paul says is the “power of God unto 
salvation”? Certainly. And the gospel really does 
cleanse, purify, baptize, and uplift the nations? 








































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































' 




















• « 







. . > 



















: : ri 

- . • 
















































. :• 


* 

i * h 















THE GREAT COMMISSION 


173 


Certainly. There is no other power, force, or influence 
except the gospel accompanied by the Holy Ghost that 
can for a single moment do such a thing. Then Christ 
must have well understood this, and this must have 
been the thought in his mind w T hen he commissioned 
the disciples to go out and preach the gospel and 
baptize the nations? Certainly. The instrument 
which does the w r ork must be conceded to be the 
instrument referred to by him, namely, the gospel. 
No other thought is possible. 


























































* 






























V % 




■ 






PART III 


THE TESTIMONY OF THE ACTS OF 
THE APOSTLES 










X 

. 





















* 






















• • - 

•V' ' 

I . r 












. ... - • A 

. 

























• .V 





. *■ «■ 























» “■ • “ • • * i 

' , . •• ?; • • 

1 \ ‘ "* ' * 










j 







































































* 

















y 








' * 
























LAUNCHING OUT INTO THE DEEP, 


V 






“'I 





.••••’».•; 


:::::.. 

JJ jijj 


>... 


mini: 


•••it!!*::::::;;;:: 


... 

JBKv/v .•••ipT: ;i!i 










■••••■ Ja 


uiKlllj, 




!!!"!•'!!!!! 






iSiHintesr, 








iiliiiijliliiiiliiiSliijiii 


•*»»-: 


1 •••■*■ •« 


..... 

ailHliiillllliliiiiiii 






.. 


iSU'.fsjj: 










laiia: 




mm _ rirrrcM. 




















































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































I • 




■ 














































PART III 


THE TESTIMONY OF THE ACTS OF 
THE APOSTLES 

CHAPTER X 
THE DAY OF PENTECOST 
THE DISCIPLES BAPTIZED 

We now come to the day of Pentecost and we see that 
which was promised actually occurring; and if there 
is yet a lingering doubt in the mind of any as to the 
nature of the baptism which was to obtain under the 
Christian dispensation, that doubt will certainly be 
dispelled as we here view that which actually took 
place, and see how thoroughly it agrees with prophetic 
representation, and with the statement of John, “He 
shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire,” 
and with Christ’s own promise, “Ye shall be baptized 
with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.” 

The story of this most wonderful baptism, as given 
in Acts 2, most abundantly proves the character of the 
baptism wherewith Christ was baptized, inasmuch as 
the character of the baptism at this time received was 
to be after the model of Christ’s own baptism, even as 
he had promised (Mark 10 : 39), and the baptism here 
conferred was that of the Holy Ghost. “And when 
the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with 

12 177 


178 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a 
sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and 
it filled all the house where they were sitting. And 
there appeared unto them cloven tongues, like as of 
fire, and it sat upon each of them. And the}^ were all 
filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with 
other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance,” etc. 

Every person will at once recognize this as an exact 
fulfillment of John’s prophecy, namely, “He shall bap¬ 
tize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire,” and also 
of Christ’s promise, “Ye shall be baptized with the 
Holy Ghost not many days hence.” We also learn, on 
the authority of Peter, that what here transpired was 
the fulfillment of still another prophecy, made by Joel, 
namely, “And it shall come to pass in the last days, 
saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh : 
and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,” etc. 
We thus see that what God through Joel denominates 
pouring out his Spirit, and what John and Christ call 
baptism of the Holy Ghost, and what the author of the 
Acts of the Apostles terms being “filled with the Holy 
Ghost” are all one and the same thing, and that hence 
the baptism w T hich here occurred must have been 
known and held to be such by God centuries before 
this event, and therefore must be the thing first indi¬ 
cated in Scripture as the fulfillment of all the washings 
and purifications therein ordered. 

HOLY GHOST BAPTISM. 

All authorities concede that what was bestowed upon 
the disciples at this time was Holy Ghost baptism. 
Some seem to be loath to concede so much, yet they 


THE DAY OF PENTECOST 


179 


will acknowledge it to have been such. It was such. 
It came upon them. They experienced all that legiti¬ 
mately inhered in the promise of God and Christ to 
them, not only as they had conceived of it, but also 
as fulfilling the desire and conception of God with 
reference thereto ; for we must realize that this Pente¬ 
costal day was the climax of the ages preceding it, 
in the mind and heart of God, with reference to 
humanity. 

To suppose that earthly water was in the mind of 
God as he looked forward to this day and time, is to 
belittle God himself. Neither will it do to say that no 
doubt water baptism occurred at this time, but that in 
some way it was overlooked and not recorded, when 
the fact is that everything else considered of the 
slightest importance in connection with this event is 
given in abundant detail, including not only the 
descent of the Holy Ghost, but the time, place, and 
motive of the gathering, the “rushing mighty wind,” 
the “cloven tongues, like as of fire” sitting upon each 
one, the attitude in which they were when they 
received it, the effect it had upon them, the amazement 
of the multitude, the different countries represented 
and the different languages spoken, the mocking un¬ 
belief of some, and the charge of drunkenness on the 
part of others; in fact, every possible detail seems to 
have been mentioned ; but this one thing, namely, 
water baptism, which is deemed by so many to be the 
most important of all, and which is held as being nec¬ 
essary to salvation, is in no way referred to, and hu¬ 
manity is left in absolute ignorance as to its having 
occurred. On the contrary, another character of 


180 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


baptism is emphasized, and elaborated in such a way 
as to lead any unprejudiced mind at once to determine 
that no other could have been thought of or engaged 
in. Indeed, as we shall see, there is but one baptism 
declared by God’s truth, and this having occurred, no 
other could have been at all possible. 

But it may be held that all this was especially for the 
disciples, that it is not taught that others were to be 
similarly indued, and that the only way by which the 
character of the baptism which they were instructed 
to confer may be ascertained is to examine the charac¬ 
ter of baptism urged upon and received by the people. 
We will therefore pass on to some definite utterance 
or act of the apostles themselves, which will reveal 
their understanding of this matter; for their great 
work in life from this time on was to preach the gospel 
and to baptize the nations, and if the baptism where¬ 
with they were to baptize was not that of Christ and 
the Holy Ghost, but of water, then no doubt water 
baptism will everywhere be emphasized, and most 
strenuously insisted upon as the baptism contemplated 
in the commission. Otherwise there would be great 
liability on the part of the people not to recognize that 
it was earthly water that was being insisted upon 
when baptism was urged, and hence their salvation 
would be jeopardized ; for it must be conceded that if 
earthly water was the thing referred to by Christ when 
the commission was given, and that which they were 
directed to bestow as that upon which eternal life was 
to be predicated, then water baptism becomes the most 
absolutely important thing possible, and must not be 
misrepresented or anything else allowed to usurp its 


THE DAY OF PENTECOST 


181 


place and function, even the Holy Ghost itself. The 
apostles would therefore be obliged to insist strongly 
upon its observance, in view of its very great and over¬ 
shadowing importance; and especially so, as all the 
religious teachers who had hitherto spoken representing 
the new religion, including these very same apostles, 
had for over three years previously filled Jerusalem 
and all Judea and Galilee with teaching directly the 
opposite of this which was now to be inculcated. 
Isaiah, Joel, Malachi, John the Baptist, Christ and his 
disciples, had all taught and emphasized the fact that 
the baptism of the Holy Ghost should distinctly 
characterize the new dispensation, as in contradistinc¬ 
tion to the old. .Peter had just recited to them the 
prophecy of Joel, which promised that “all flesh” 
should be the recipient of this Holy Ghost baptism, 
and had declared : “This Jesus hath God raised up, 
whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the 
right hand of God exalted, and having received of the 
Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed 
forth this which ye now see and hear.” It is stated 
not only that the Holy Ghost was here poured out, but 
that these people saw and heard the accompanying 
manifestations which proclaimed the Spirit’s presence. 
Not only had both Christ and his disciples filled 
Jerusalem with their “doctrine,” but I suppose it 
would be true to say that there was not a Jew in all 
the country who did not know that Christ and his 
disciples had utterly and everywhere repudiated water 
baptism, never engaging in it themselves, but on the 
contrary seeking, and that most publicly, to turn the 
minds and hearts of the people from it as a ground 


182 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


of hope for eternal life, and had called down on them¬ 
selves the fierce anger of the scribes and Pharisees for 
so doing. 

Therefore, these people, who were doubtless aware of 
the previous attitude and teaching of both Christ and 
his apostles upon this subject, could by no means be 
prepared for this very sudden and complete “change 
of front,” so to speak, and the resurrection of this old 
ordinance into such prominence as to make its observ¬ 
ance necessary to salvation, when for three years or 
more the utmost effort of these men and their Master, 
whom they followed, had been to disabuse the minds 
of the people of its importance. I repeat, that such a 
sudden change of policy and practice upon the part of 
the disciples would have to be repeatedly and minutely 
explained, or there would be very great danger of the 
people catching the idea that it was the Holy Ghost 
baptism that was being urged upon them, the same 
which John had insisted was the baptism of Christ, 
and which the apostles had just now received, and 
which must have been considered by them infinitely 
preferable to water baptism, to which they had been 
accustomed all their lives, yet from the observance of 
which they had never derived any benefit whatever. 
Indeed, if these people received only a water baptism, 
after having witnessed the wonderful baptism of the 
disciples with the Holy Ghost, we could be moved to 
sympathy for them even at this distance for the sad 
disappointment which they were called upon to endure. 
But what nonsense, yea, more, what blasphemy, to 
suppose that the baptism enjoined in the commission, 
and here received and urged, was anything less than 


THE DAY OF PENTECOST 


183 


the baptism of Christ, namely, that of the Holy Ghost 
through the preaching of the gospel according to the 
commission. 

THE THREE THOUSAND BAPTIZED. 

From the short account of Peter’s sermon given in 
Acts, we gather that it was a lucid setting forth of 
the gospel message, together with the conditions held 
as being necessary to salvation. That Peter w T as here 
inspired by the indwelling Christ will be conceded, and 
that Christ, according to his promise, was there, and 
spoke in and through Peter, controlling thought, utter¬ 
ance, and spirit, thus making this first gospel message 
one of mighty convincing, resurrecting power, is also 
evident. Under the sway of the Holy Spirit thou¬ 
sands became convicted, and anxiously inquired 
of Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and breth¬ 
ren, what shall we do ? ” Listen, 0 earth, for now is 
to be revealed by Christ himself, speaking in and 
through Peter, that which for all time is to stand as the 
sum total of what man is to do and to be in order to 
be saved, and we shall here see whether the 
promise which John the Baptist made, namely, 
“He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost,” is to 
stand, or whether the promise applied only to the 
apostles, and is to be denied to all others ; for it is not 
possible to conceive that Christ in Peter would deny 
and repudiate what Christ had said and done while 
here in the body, or that he would now reinstate and 
set up an ordinance which during his life on earth 
he had utterly repudiated. Certainly not. Such a 
thought is impossible. 


184 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


The Baptism Enjoined by Peter. 

Now, what does Peter say to these anxious souls in¬ 
quiring the way to salvation? “Repent, and be baptized 
every one of you [in water? or with water? No, but] 
in the name of Jesus Christ,” or, as in the commission, 
“in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
Holy Ghost.” Remember that the Christ who was 
speaking in and through Peter was he of whom it had 
been said, “ The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because 
... he hath sent me to heal the broken hearted, to 
preach deliverance to the captives, the recovering of 
sight to the blind,” etc; the same Christ of whom 
Heaven had revealed to John that “he shall baptize 
you with the Holy Ghost ” ; the same Christ who but a 
few days before had said, “Lo, I am with you alway, 
even unto the end of the world,” and who had also 
promised that they should be “baptized with the Holy 
Ghost not many days hence,” which promise had just 
now been fulfilled ; the same Christ who, after having 
prayed that his apostles might be sanctified through 
the truth, immediately added, “Neither pray I for 
these alone, but for them also which shall believe on 
me through their word.” 

Was it this truth, this sanctification, this baptism, 
that was here being urged upon these people? Or 
was it water baptism, which Christ had avoided in that 
day when the heavens were opened and he received 
the baptism of the Spirit? Was it that which he had 
overthrown at the marriage feast in “ Cana of Galilee,” 
where in his first miracle he changed the old baptis¬ 
mal water into the wine representative of his own 
blood? Was it the baptism on account of which his 


THE DAY OF PENTECOST 185 

disciples had incurred the anger of the scribes and 
Pharisees because they would not engage therein, and 
in reference to which he said, “ Every plant, which my 
Heavenly Father hath not planted, shall he rooted 
up,” denominating those who insisted that it was 
necessary to salvation “blind leaders of the blind,” 
and prophesying that they all should perish in the 
water “ditch” (fioffuvov)? Was the thing here recom¬ 
mended to these people in and through which salva¬ 
tion was to be secured, the same that he told the 
woman of Samaria at Jacob’s well was of no use 
whatever for such a purpose, at the same time urging 
upon her water that would give “eternal life,” which 
water he said was himself? Did he here recommend 
earthly water, when at Bethesda’s pool he taught the 
multitude of “sick and impotent folk” that healing, 
cleansing, purification, lay not here, but in the Man of 
Galilee ? 

Could Peter have properly represented him here by 
urging earthly water, when “in the last day, that great 
day of the feast,” when Israel’s millions were commem¬ 
orating that scene in the desert when the smitten rock 
was made to yield up its cooling waters (emblem of 
this day of Pentecost), and when he sought to draw 
their attention away from such empty forms, which 
now no longer had any significance, inasmuch as he 
had come whom it represented, namely, Jesus, who 
“stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him 
come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, 
as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow 
rivers of living water,” it being immediately added that 
“this spake he of the Spirit,” this same Holy Ghost 


186 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


which it will be remembered had just been poured out 
upon the disciples? Was it earthly water baptism 
that was here recommended when even in the garden 
and in the very shadow of the cross he strove in mortal 
agony to show, writing it in blood (his sweat being 
turned thereto), that nothing but the blood of Christ 
can cleanse from sin? And even on the cross the 
spear thrust told again the Scripture truth that “the 
Spirit, and the water, and the blood . . . agree in one,” 
namely, Christ (“he that hath the Son hath life”). 

And yet again, even as we have seen, he tarries 
forty days to open to them the Scriptures and tell 
them once again “the things pertaining to the king¬ 
dom of God,” the very last of which was, “John truly 
baptized with water; but [ or, and ] ye shall be bap¬ 
tized with the Holy Ghost,” which promise, as we have 
seen, had, so far as the disciples were concerned, just 
now been fulfilled. But was Holy Ghost baptism to 
stop with them? Were they to be for all time the 
only living representatives of God in Christ on earth, 
or were others who through their word should believe, 
according to his prayer, to be one with them and 
Christ and God by being, as were they, baptized with 
the baptism of the indwelling Christ? 

It seems that no one would dare even to insinuate, 
much less to teach, that the baptism here urged and 
received by these three thousand people was that of 
earthly water. Allow me here to make 

An Illustration. 

Two friends have each been sick for years with 
paralysis. They have been, and are, near neighbors. 


THE DAY OF PENTECOST 


187 


Each knows the other to be sick, but that is all. They 
have not been able to see or speak with each other for 
years. One day a physician, who is also a philan¬ 
thropist, visits the town. He makes the acquaintance 
of one of these men. Before leaving he prescribes a 
remedy which he declares is a sure cure for paralysis. 
He persuades the man to take the remedy, and to the 
sick man’s surprise and joy it makes him well—sound 
and hearty as ever he was. In his gladness at being 
restored, he inquires what the stranger charges for such 
a cure, and is informed that it costs nothing, except 
this : “ Freely ye have received, freely give.” At once 
the man thinks of his neighbor, and with eager haste 
he goes to him to tell him of the wondrous remedy. 
He bounds into his presence. The other is astonished, 
but at once in eager, anxious voice inquires what he 
must do in order to be saved from this lingering death. 
What will be the thing recommended to this man by 
his friend? Will it be that which cured him, or will 
he at such a time recommend some old worn-out 
remedy which he himself had often tried, but from 
the use of which he had derived no benefit whatever ? 
Would such a course be thought of by any honest man 
as being possible? No; the thing which the friend 
will recommend will surely be that which worked the 
cure for himself, and the sick man will so understand it. 

What was it that had effected such a wondrous 
change in Peter and the other apostles? Was it water 
baptism ? It seems a sin even to utter such a thought. 
Was it not the power of the baptism of the Holy Ghost 
which they had just received which had transformed 
these men? Yes, is the only answer any honest man 


188 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


can make. Well, then, was it this same baptism which 
they had just received and which had done so much 
for them that they were now recommending to these 
people? Is it possible for any sensible person to con¬ 
ceive that something different from that high and holy 
induement which they had received at the hands of 
God would be offered to these people as that upon 
which they might safely rely for salvation ? No, it is not. 

Peter would not have dared to offer in the Master’s 
name anything less than that which he himself had 
received, and all agree that Peter and the other apostles 
had just been baptized with the Holy Ghost. To say, 
as some do, that these people had no conception of any 
other baptism than that of water, and hence could 
only have understood Peter’s remark as having refer¬ 
ence to water baptism, is to say that they had been 
dead or sleeping for the last three years, and had never 
heard of Christ and his apostles, although all Jerusalem, 
Judea, Samaria, and Galilee had for three years or more 
been kept in a constant state of unrest and turmoil on 
account of the heretical teachings of this Man and his 
disciples, especially upon the subject of water baptism. 

But even if they had not known what the Holy 
Ghost baptism was in all its fullness, this would 
be no matter of surprise, inasmuch as few persons who 
have not experienced the grace of our Lord Jesus 
Christ do understand it. I suppose it might with truth 
be said that even the apostles themselves had under¬ 
stood but little of all that inhered in the promise of 
Christ to them, namely, “Ye shall be baptized with 
the Holy Ghost,” but their ignorance would by no 
means prevent Christ from carrying out his part of the 


THE DAY OF PENTECOST 


189 


agreement. The fact is, these people did not need to 
know the full significance of the baptism promised, ex¬ 
cept to know that it included salvation from sin and its 
consequences. Faith, repentance, and glad reception of 
the word were all that was required of them, and where 
these obtain, Holy Ghost baptism, being God’s part, is 
sure to follow. It is said that these did so do, and were, 
according to the promise, baptized, “and the same day 
there were added unto them about three thousand souls.” 

Peter’s answer to those w T ho would prevent the 
further spread of the gospel of Christ, “And we are 
his witnesses of these things ; and so is also the Holy 
Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him ” 
(Acts 5:32), proves the universality of the gift of the 
Holy Ghost to all believers; and inasmuch as Christ 
himself denominates the outpouring of the Holy Ghost 
baptism, are we not forced to the conclusion that as 
faith comes by hearing the gospel message, and obedi¬ 
ence on the part of those, who hear is always accom¬ 
panied by the reception of the Holy Ghost, this was 
the thing referred to by Christ when he sent his dis¬ 
ciples forth to preach and to baptize? 

What sane person can, after all this mass of evidence, 
still continue to think that water baptism is the thing 
talked about as being the fulfillment of the term bap¬ 
tize? If water baptism was to be everywhere introduced 
as the one essential thing, and to be forever stamped 
upon the mind of man as a divinely appointed ordi¬ 
nance, in and through which mankind was to be saved, 
no better or more suitable time or place could have been 
chosen for the promulgation of the fact than on this the 
very first public occasion when the doors of the church 


190 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


swung open, so to speak, to receive the ingathering thou¬ 
sands, then and there to have so impressed the absolute 
necessity of water baptism as that a misunderstanding 
would have been impossible. But instead of doing so, 
this splendid opportunity was allowed to pass without 
even mentioning the use of w T ater in any form what¬ 
ever, while at the same time they were passing through 
the most remarkable experience ever vouchsafed to the 
church, and to which it would ever recur as establish¬ 
ing that which was to be considered essential to recep¬ 
tion into the Christian church. This is simply astound¬ 
ing in view of the great ado made about w r ater baptism 
in some quarters. 

We find here spoken of, and thus emphasized, 
repentance, faith, gladness of reception of the word on 
the part of the people, the pouring out of the Spirit, 
etc., but the one thing most important of all, namely, 
water baptism, seems to have been passed by without 
notice. Is not this very remarkable? Yes, on any other 
supposition than that nothing of .the kind (namely, 
water baptism) was engaged in, but not at all so if the 
writer was simply giving an account of what actually 
occurred. As water baptism was not among the occur¬ 
rences of the day, it is difficult to see how the matter 
could have been referred to, unless the account had 
been untruthfully made. But, fortunately for the 
world, the account is no doubt correct, and although it 
does not say that they were all sprinkled, or poured, 
or immersed, or that water was applied to them in any 
form, it does say that they were all baptized or “filled 
with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with tongues, 
as the Spirit gave them utterance.” 


CHAPTER XI 

POST-PENTECOSTAL BAPTISMS 

But let us proceed, following closely the acts of the 
apostles, to see if elsewhere the matter of water baptism 
is referred to as being that in which the apostles them¬ 
selves engaged, or that whose use they sanctioned, or 
whether in any way they gave it to be understood that 
the baptism talked about and insisted upon was that 
of water. Their mission from this time forward was to 
baptize the nations, and if water was the thing talked 
about we will now find them engaging in its adminis¬ 
tration. 

THE LAME MAN HEALED. 

The next incident to which our attention is called 
is that of the man “lame from his mother’s womb,” 
whom Peter and John healed (or baptized) as they 
were going up into the temple to pray. This miracle 
created quite a sensation, being the first instance of 
physical healing recorded in which the disciples put to 
the test the wondrous power so recently conferred upon 
them by the outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the day 
of Pentecost. Was this which we now find the apostles 
engaged in, any part of that which naturally inheres 
in baptism ? Certainly. Here was a man who needed 
healing, cleansing, baptism. The remark of Peter, “ In 
the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and w T alk,” 
and his further remark to the people, “Why look ye so 

191 


192 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holi¬ 
ness we had made this man to walk? The God of 
Abraham . . . hath glorified his Son Jesus . . . and 
his name through faith in his name . . . hath given 
him this perfect soundness/” etc., discloses very plainly 
what we are to understand by the command of Christ 
to baptize “in the name,” etc. 

PETER AND JOHN ARRESTED. 

Peter and John, being taken. to task, or arrested, 
because of this act, took occasion to exhort the people 
and to preach to them the gospel, urging them to 
repent and be converted, that their sins might be 
washed away when the “ time of refreshing should come 
from the presence of the Lord ” (not from the presence 
of water, except as Christ was the water); and further 
on we find that many of those who heard the word 
thus preached believed, to the number of five thousand. 
Again, on the next day having another opportunity to 
speak, and being filled with the Holy Ghost, they again 
preached Jesus and the resurrection, and after assem¬ 
bling together with others “they were all filled with 
the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with 
boldness.” 

Here again we find a narrative, minute in many 
of its details, recounting scenes and incidents running 
through quite a length of time, and while we find, as 
before, repentance, conversion, belief, and prayer, and 
filling with the Holy Ghost (even of the entire com¬ 
pany of them that believed) all spoken of, and thus 
again emphasized, we find not one word about the 
great importance of water baptism, not even a hint as 


t 



AN ANGEL VISITANT. 


192 


“Go stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of 
this life.” 









1h 


POST-PENTECOSTAL BAPTISMS 


193 


to its haying been administered, although we are given 
to understand that the whole company of those who 
believed were “added to the church.” Very remark¬ 
able, is it not ? Baptism of the Holy Ghost is every¬ 
where emphasized, but nothing whatever is said of 
water. And again we feel warranted in saying that 
if water baptism were at all included in the great 
commission so recently given them, they were sadly 
neglecting their divine instructions. 

But let us look still farther. It may be that else¬ 
where we shall find them more true to their great 
commission. 

In Acts 5 : 12-16, after particularly describing the 
death of Ananias, it is stated that “by the hands of the 
apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among 

the people.(And believers were the more added 

to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women ;) in¬ 
somuch that they brought forth the sick into the 
streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that at the 
least the shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow 
some of them. There came also a multitude out of the 
cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, 
and them which were vexed with unclean spirits: and 
they were healed [or, baptized] every one.” But 
water was not mentioned. Even Peter’s shadow seems 
to have been thought of more worth than was water. 

Here we find the apostles doing just what their great 
Master had done before them, during his three years of 
active ministry on earth. Indeed, this seems to be but 
a continuation of that which he declared his mission to 
be, and that which the prophets had marked out as the 
work in which he was to be engaged, namely, “the 

13 


194 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath . . . 
sent me ... to preach deliverance to the captives, and 
recovering of sight to the blind,” etc. 

We are given to understand that Christ did what he 
did by the “finger of God,” which was nothing else 
than the same Holy Ghost; and his rebuke to those 
who attributed his power to the devil was, that they 
uttered blasphemy against, not himself, but the Holy 
Ghost (just the sin of those who to-day are urging 
water in the place of the Holy Ghost), clearly showing, 
as is everywhere else manifest, that he did what he did 
through the power of the Holy Ghost, with which he 
was so wondrously indued upon the banks of the Jor¬ 
dan in the very beginning of his ministry. This was 
the true baptism, with which he himself was baptized, 
which he promised to his disciples, and which was to 
remain with them always, “ even the Spirit of truth, 
which proceedeth from the Father.” 

PETER AND JOHN REARRESTED. 

We find that, being enraged at the disciples, the 
rulers again caused them to be arrested ; but being de¬ 
livered by the angel of the Lord, they were commanded 
to “go, stand and speak in the temple to the people all 
[mark you, all~\ the words of this life” (or of the way 
of salvation through the gospel of Christ). We are in¬ 
formed that they did so ; for “ daily in the temple, and 
in every house, they ceased not to teach and to preach 
Jesus Christ,” the Holy Ghost bearing them witness. 

Here again we have a lengthy survey of the daily 
life of the apostles, extending through quite a period 
of time, in which multitudes are said to have em- 


POST-PENTECOSTAL BAPTISMS 


195 


braced the gospel to their salvation, and yet amid all 
the instruction given and all the work accomplished 
no mention is made of water, while the work of the 
Holy Ghost is particularly emphasized. 

THE GOSPEL BY STEPHEN. 

But again we proceed, and now we find certain 
minor questions coming to the front, such as the equal 
distribution of the needed daily portion of food. Among 
those chosen for this work we find Stephen and Philip. 
But the apostles, we are told, thought it incumbeht 
upon them to give themselves “continually to prayer, 
and to the ministry of the word,” and this they did. 
Again water fails to elicit even a passing notice, but 
the men chosen for this work are most particularly 
stated to have been “full of the Holy Ghost”—baptized. 

One of these, Stephen, is the next person brought 
forward whose acts and utterances are thought worthy 
of record by the inspired writer. In his preaching we 
find the following: “A Prophet shall the Lord your 
God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; 
him shall ye hear,” etc., and after citing to them their 
privileges and also their sins, he addressed them thus: 
“Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, 
ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers 
did, so do ye.” Resisting the Holy Ghost was the sin 
of their fathers, and is also said to be their present sin. 
They were said to be uncircumcised in heart. It was 
not that they were so in the flesh, but in heart. It 
was not that they resisted circumcision in the flesh. 
They had all, no doubt, been circumcised in that way. 
But circumcision is no more an affair of the flesh than 


196 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


is baptism, as we shall shortly see. However, I have 
quoted this passage not so much to prove this fact, as 
to show that another opportunity for declaring and en¬ 
forcing the very great importance of water baptism has 
been allowed to pass without in any way referring to 
it, and that, too, when the essentials of the gospel mes¬ 
sage are supposed to have been fully set forth. 

THE GOSPEL BY PHILIP. 

We now learn that a great persecution of the church 
arose, and that the company of disciples were all 
scattered abroad “except the apostles.” One of those 
who were thus driven out of Jerusalem was Philip, the 
fellow-servant of Stephen, whose martyrdom was the 
signal for their flight from Jerusalem. It is stated 
that Philip went down to Samaria and preached Christ 
to the Samaritans, casting out devils, and healing 
many who were sick, insomuch that “there was great 
joy in that city”; and “when they believed Philip 
preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, 
and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both 
men and women.” 

It seems as though this statement had never been 
carefully scrutinized or analyzed. What is the cause 
here said to have produced the result, baptism ? 
It is definitely stated to have been the preaching 
of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God, 
and the name of Jesus Christ, and the belief and 
reception thereof by the people. Was this preaching 
of the gospel by Philip the only instrumentality in 
and through which the baptism of the people is said 
to have been effected? So far as the record goes to 


POST-PENTECOSTAL BAPTISMS 


197 


show, yes. And was there no water baptism incul¬ 
cated or engaged in by Philip? Not according to 
the record. There is not even a hint of such a thing. 
The fact is, the gospel is in itself sufficient; nothing 
else is at all necessary. Paul says of it, “I am not 
ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power 
of God unto salvation.” 

Christ’s mission perpetuated. 

We have before shown that the mission of Christ to 
the world was to baptize through the power of the 
Divine Spirit, and that he, reiterating the prophecy 
concerning himself, declared that “the Spirit of the 
Lord God” was upon him, in order that he might 
unstop the deaf ears, and open the eyes of the blind, 
and that the lame man should be made to leap as an 
hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing, etc., thus 
making his mission of baptism and his mission of 
healing to be the same. 

That this, his mission, was to be perpetuated through 
the agency of men indued with the Holy Ghost, we 
have seen, and yet we must not suppose that all of 
those who were called into the Master’s service, and 
who were “filled with the Holy Ghost,” were possessed 
with like powers and gifts. On the contrary, we learn 
in the twelfth chapter of I. Corinthians that there were 
great diversities in this regard. “Now there are diver¬ 
sities of gifts, but the same Spirit. ... For to one 
is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; ... to 
another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit. . . . 
Are all apostles ? are all prophets ? are all teachers ? 
are all workers of miracles ? have all the gifts of heal- 


198 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


ing ? ” etc. This explains the whole situation. Philip’s 
“gift” was as yet evidently limited to the preparatory 
work of the gospel, such as preaching and teaching 
the things pertaining to the kingdom of God, adding 
thereto physical healing, even as Christ and his apos¬ 
tles had done prior to the day of Pentecost, when the 
fuller baptism, namely, the outpouring and indwelling 
of the Holy Spirit, rendered the redemptive work of 
Christ complete. 

This work of preaching the gospel and healing the 
sick is certainly as fully entitled to be designated bap¬ 
tism as was that of John, who, although preaching the 
true gospel of the kingdom and complete salvation 
through Christ, never performed physical healing. 

That Philip thus prepared the hearts of the people 
for the indwelling Spirit of Christ, which, although not 
conferred under his administration, was afterwards con¬ 
ferred under the administration of Peter and John, who 
were sent from Jerusalem in order that the gqod work 
begun might have its proper and legitimate culmina¬ 
tion, is manifest. This matter is set forth thus in 
Acts 8 : 14-17 : “Now when the apostles which were 
at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the 
word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: 
who, when they were come down, prayed for them, 
that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (for as yet he 
was fallen upon none of them : only they were baptized 
in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their 
hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.” 

All of this is but another exhibition of the fact that 
the work of grace upon the human heart and soul is 
often accomplished through different instrumentalities. 


POST-PENTECOSTAL BAPTISMS 199 

Not only was this true during the apostolic age, but it 
is equally true to-day. It is still true that one plants, 
another waters, etc. This is illustrated further by the 
words of Christ, “I sent you to reap that whereon ye 
bestowed no labor: other men labored, and ye are 
entered into their labors.” This saying of Christ makes 
plain the fact that all previous history was but prepara¬ 
tory to the apostolic age. Others, including John the 
Baptist, had wrought to this end. 

Even as this remark of Christ with reference to the 
apostles being the inheritors of all the previous spirit¬ 
ual endeavor of other godly men who lived and 
wrought through all previous history was true, so was 
it also true that Philip had labored with these Samar¬ 
itans, preaching the gospel of the kingdom unto them 
and adding thereto physical and mental healing, yea, 
purifying their hearts to the extent of “ repentance for 
the remission of sins.” And yet it is evident that 
Philip did not reap the full reward of his labors, inas¬ 
much as the narrative shows that it was under the 
subsequent labors of Peter and John that the full 
baptism of the Holy Ghost was received. Philip had 
“labored,” and Peter and John had “entered into” and 
reaped the benefit thereof, thus fulfilling the truth of 
Scripture as manifest in the declaration of Paul, “I 
have planted, Apollos watered ; but God gave the 
increase.” 

It ought not, therefore, to surprise us to learn that 
Philip’s baptism was only a partial baptism, inasmuch 
as John declared that his was limited to the prepara¬ 
tive work of “repentance for the remission of sins,” 
and Christ and all his apostles were in like manner 


200 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


circumscribed for a time, or until after the day of 
Pentecost; but the fact is, that mankind in general, 
even in this day, are the subjects of both of these halves 
of the great whole of Christianity. What minister, or 
other Christian worker, familiar with the processes by 
which a sinner is converted and becomes a child of 
God, does not know that there is a preparative work 
upon the soul ere the Christ is made manifest or his 
indwelling through the reception of the Holy Ghost 
rendered possible, even as we have previously seen? 
This matter, then, of Philip’s preparative work among 
the Samaritans, whereby they were placed in such 
condition of heart and soul as to be able subsequently 
to receive the Holy Ghost through the mediation 
of Peter and John, is but in harmony with all ex¬ 
perience, as well as with the w r hole tenor of the gospel. 

SIMON THE SORCERER. 

Not only is the fact that Philip’s work, or baptism, 
was thus limited as to results clearly revealed in the 
statement that as yet the Holy Ghost “ was fallen upon 
none of them,” but the specific reference to Simon the 
sorcerer is an additional proof thereof. This man had 
been made the subject of Philip’s healing and was 
hence properly said to have been baptized, no doubt 
by having the evil spirit which possessed him driven 
out. But when Peter and John had come, and “when 
Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles’ 
hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them 
money, saying, Give me also this power, that on 
whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy 
Ghost. But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish 


POST-PENTECOSTAL BAPTISMS 


201 


with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of 
God may be purchased with money. Thou hast 
neither part nor lot in this matter [namely, in the 
power to bestow the Holy Ghost] : for thy heart is not 
right in the sight of God. Repent. . . . For I perceive 
that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond 
of iniquity.” 

We thus see that here was one who had been made 
the subject of Philip’s healing whose heart was “not 
right in the sight of God,” clearly showing that he 
still remained unbaptized in the highest sense of the 
term. His heart was not even yet ready for the in¬ 
dwelling Spirit of Christ, although it is said that this 
same man had previously been baptized by Philip. 
It is really immaterial to the argument whether we 
hold the baptism here spoken of to have been mental 
or bodily healing, or “the baptism of repentance for 
the remission of sins,” or both. In any case it was 
not the full baptism of the “ Holy Ghost and of fire,” 
which alone is the final and ultimate baptism upon 
which eternal life is predicated. 

That Christ added to John’s baptism physical heal¬ 
ing, and that he “ went about doing good, and healing 
all that were oppressed of the devil,” is declared of 
him. That all of this, including his calling of the 
people to repentance, is specifically and properly re¬ 
ferred to as baptism, is true. But that even Christ 
himself did not impart the Holy Ghost while he 
remained in the flesh, is specifically declared : “For 
the Holy Ghost was not yet given [or, poured out] ; 
because that Jesus was not yet glorified” (John 7 : 39). 
It was that this might be accomplished that he went 


202 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


away, as he said to his disciples, “It is expedient [or, 
needful] for you that I go away : for if I go not away, 
the Comforter will not come unto you.” 

It was because of this pouring out or 6oming of 
the Holy Ghost that it was true, even as Christ had 
said, “He that believeth on me, greater works than 
these shall he do.” These greater works referred to 
the imparting of the Holy Ghost, a power w T hich the 
disciples had after Christ’s glorification which even 
he himself did not exercise while in the flesh, his 
baptism while in the flesh being confined to the 
forgiveness of sins and to bodily healing (“that ye 
may know that the Son of man hath power on earth 
[that is, while on earth in the flesh] to forgive sins,” 
etc.). But after his resurrection and glorification his 
work and baptism were no longer limited to these 
things. On the contrary, he himself in all his wonder¬ 
working power came to dwell in the hearts of his 
children. This, and this alone, is the ultimate and full 
baptism. All else is but preparatory thereto. 

That there is such a thing as repentance and purg¬ 
ing from old sins, and even physical healing, which to 
the extent to which it operates is entitled to the name 
baptism, is true, even as we have seen. Thousands, 
however, experience religion to this extent who never 
know anything of the “renewing of the Holy Ghost” 
or of the indwelling Christ, and hence are not fully 
baptized, but are, as was Simon, still in the “gall 
of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.” This was 
true of many of those who were baptized under, or in, 
Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and John, and the 
same holds good of many who are informed of the 


POST-PENTECOSTAL BAPTISMS 


203 


great salvation through Jesus Christ. But that a man 
is not fully “baptized into Christ” until he has “put 
on Christ” and has been indued with the Divine Spirit, 
is true. 

It is true, indeed, that the preaching of the gospel 
of Christ when received in faith always results in 
repentance and conversion and the remission of all 
previous sins, and hence it is to that extent a cleans¬ 
ing, or baptism. But this is by no means the ultimate 
end. Not only is it necessary that all past sins should 
be washed away, or blotted out, but there must be the 
“refreshing” which comes “from the presence of the 
Lord.” It is not enough that we be separated from 
the old ; we must enter upon the new. Putting off “the 
old man with his deeds ” is all right, and must be done, 
but this alone is entirely inadequate, and by no means 
should be counted as in any way synonymous 
with complete baptism into Christ, or equivalent to 
salvation, for it is not. We must most assuredly “put 
on Christ” ere we can be said to be truly baptized. 
(Gal. 3 : 27.) That this is just where Simon the sor¬ 
cerer lacked, is evident. He had been healed, baptized, 
or cleansed, as I have said, but the putting on of “the 
new man” was something of which he had as yet no 
experience. While this preparative work had been, 
performed upon him, it is distinctly stated that as yet 
the Holy Ghost “was fallen upon none of them.” 

This explains the whole situation, not only with 
reference to Simon, but with reference to all those who, 
to all appearances, make a good start toward a better 
life. They stumble at this “stumbling-stone,” and the 
stumbling is a fatal one. Millions have made ship- 


204 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


wreck of their faith here, as did Simon. I mean 
that, not understanding the terms of the gospel, they 
are not impressed with the necessity of the indwelling 
of Christ. They do not seem to understand that to have 
“Christ formed” within is the only “hope of glory,” 
and that a baptism which comes short of this is not the 
baptism commanded, or which produces the result held 
to be of so great importance, and must not be con¬ 
founded with that entire purification which the Christ 
was, according to prophecy, to accomplish through the 
preaching of the gospel and the operation of the Holy 
Ghost. 

That repentance, faith, and the remission of sins are 
all essential prerequisites to the outpouring of the 
Divine Spirit is true, and that there can be no indwell¬ 
ing of Christ without these is everywhere taught; but 
there is no absolute assurance that, because these have 
been experienced, the other will surely follow, and 
hence there are always found those who, going no 
farther than this first preparatory cleansing, are soon 
found returning like “the sow that was washed to her 
wallowing in the mire,” the necessary change in the 
“natural” not having been effected. The experience 
of this man Simon is a startling revelation of what is 
entirely possible to occur in the case of a person who 
has been wrought upon by the power of God to the 
extent of being made partaker of the Holy Ghost in 
this preliminary work, yet who still fails of the purify¬ 
ing grace of God as it is realized in the indwelling of 
Jesus Christ our Lord. 

This possibility of failing of the grace of God is 
perhaps even more fully set forth in Hebrews 6, where 


POST-PENTECOSTAL BAPTISMS 


205 


this partial baptism, namely, the baptism of repentance 
from dead works, is under discussion. Paul says, in 
verses 4-6: “For it is impossible for those who were 
once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, 
and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have 
tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the 
world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them 
again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to them¬ 
selves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open 
shame.” Christ refers to the same possibility in Matthew 
12 : 43-45 : “When the unclean spirit is gone out of a 
man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and 
findeth none. Then he saith, I will return into my 
house from whence I came out; and when he is come, 
he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished [baptized]. 
Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other 
spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in 
and dwell there : and the last state of that man is 
worse than the first.” 

These, with other passages, show the entire pos¬ 
sibility of failing of the grace of God as it is in Christ 
Jesus our Lord. This is exactly what happened to 
this man. The evil spirit had been driven out; the 
sorcerer was such no longer; the heart had been par¬ 
tially prepared for better occupancy, but the Christ 
had not entered into the heart to its ultimate and ever¬ 
lasting cleansing. Therefore it was that his heart was 
not “right,” because the Holy Ghost had not yet been 
poured out, although bodily or mental healing had 
been received. 

But, as I have already said, whatever else is here 
enjoined or recorded, nothing whatever is said of water 


206 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


baptism. We are left without any knowledge of its 
haying been administered to any person by either 
Philip, or Peter, or John. The account closes with 
the statement that haying witnessed for Christ by 
preaching the word in Samaria, Peter and John returned 
to Jerusalem, having fulfilled the terms of their great 
commission, as they had understood its provisions, and 
according to their interpretation thereof, by preaching 
the word, healing the sick, and making those who 
gladly received the word subjects of the Holy Spirit’s 
influence ; as it is stated, they “ prayed for them, that 
they might receive the Holy Ghost: (for as yet he was 
fallen upon none of them).” In all of this there is not 
a single instance of water baptism recorded. 


CHAPTER XII 
THE EUNUCH BAPTIZED 

This incident, as recorded in Acts 8, is confidently 
relied upon by the advocates of water baptism in 
general, and by those who believe in immersion in 
particular, as furnishing a sure and unanswerable 
argument that water baptism is the baptism contem¬ 
plated in Scripture, and enjoined upon and practiced 
by the early Christian church. But those who would 
seek in this passage sure and certain evidence for water 
baptism in any form must submit to disappointment; 
for, like every other passage which we have examined, 
this also will be found incapable of being used as a 
witness by which this cherished error may be main¬ 
tained, and earthly water will be found as impossible 
to this scripture as to all others, even as might well be 
expected in view of the necessary unity and harmony 
of the gospel story upon all questions in any way per¬ 
taining thereto, or in which either the duty or the 
destiny of man is involved. 

If, however, we are content to rest our faith upon 
the mere assumption that water baptism is the baptism 
talked about and emphasized in Scripture, without 
giving the matter honest and diligent investigation, we 
shall have no difficulty in arriving at the conclusion 
that the baptism contemplated in this story of Philip 
and the eunuch, and with which the latter was said 

207 


208 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


to have been baptized, was a water baptism. But if, 
on the contrary, we have at all comprehended the 
argument thus far made, or received the testimony of 
Scripture as set forth therein, we shall be compelled to 
admit that there is but one Christian baptism, and that 
this is not in or with earthly water, but is, indeed, as 
we have seen, and as the Scriptures everywhere declare, 
that wrought by the anointing of the Holy Ghost, and 
possible to the sinner only through the hearing and 
glad reception of the word of divine truth, preparing 
the heart through conviction, repentance, and the 
remission of sins. Our belief in the unity of the 
testimony of Scripture as to wdiat constitutes true bap¬ 
tism renders it utterly incredible that Philip, acting 
under the power and inspiration of the Holy Ghost, 
did at this time resuscitate, resurrect, and rehabilitate 
this old defunct ordinance of water baptism, which all 
Scripture elsewhere given by inspiration of this same 
Holy Ghost declares was fulfilled and done away with 
in Christ, and which he and his disciples everywhere 
repudiated and ignored. 

But can we consistently believe that all reference to 
water contained in this narrative contemplates spiritual 
rather than physical phenomena? Why not? If our 
faith staggers not at the Scripture representations of the 
supernatural phenomena said to have been manifested 
all through the Old Testament history of God’s deal¬ 
ings with his people, and especially his chosen ones, 
such as Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Samuel, 
Elijah, yea, all the Old Testament worthies of whom 
Paul said time would fail him to tell; if our hearts are 
made to glow and burn as we stand upon the Mount 


THE EUNUCH BAPTIZED 


209 


of Transfiguration and with Peter, James, and John 
become enveloped with the mighty presence of the 
Holy Ghost; if we have no difficulty with the scenes 
represented as transpiring upon the day of Pentecost, 
such as the “rushing mighty wind,” or the “cloven 
tongues, like as of fire,” or any other of the mighty 
tokens of God’s presence as there manifested; if we 
receive without hesitancy the story of the miraculous 
conversion of Saul of Tarsus and how he and those 
who were with him were overcome by the great light 
consequent upon the presence of the glorified Jesus ; 
and if the story of the “sheet, let down from heaven” 
in the presence of Peter upon the housetop at Joppa, 
when he was being commissioned to carry the gospel 
to the household of Cornelius, is thought to be worthy 
of belief, and the record of the mighty manifestation of 
God’s presence in said home is received with perfect 
faith upon our part as to the truthfulness of the rep¬ 
resentation,—if, I say, all these records of the mighty 
manifestations of God’s presence are true, and these 
manifestations are not to be associated with or attribu¬ 
ted to physical phenomena or agencies, how does it 
come that we are so ready to attribute to earthly, physi¬ 
cal phenomena the mighty manifestations recorded in 
this story of the presence of God and Christ through 
the power of the Ploly Ghost as here experienced by 
Philip and the eunuch? 

Why, I inquire, must we believe that the water here 
spoken of is the earthly element, while believing that 
all these others of which I have spoken as set forth in 
Scripture are of a spiritual and supernatural character? 
Is there any better evidence for believing the one to be 

14 


210 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


spiritual than the other? Why not suppose that the 
“pillar of cloud” overshadowing the camp of Israel or 
the cloud in which the disciples were enveloped upon 
the Mount of Transfiguration was earthly and physi¬ 
cal, or that the fire in the “burning bush” or the 
Shekinah light or the Pentecostal flame was but 
earthly and physical ? Why, I repeat, is this mighty 
manifestation of the presence of God to Philip and the 
eunuch, although spoken of under the form or appear¬ 
ance of water, to be considered an earthly phenomenon, 
when the whole narrative is a realistic setting forth of 
the divine power and presence as complete and full as 
that contained in any other passage of Scripture ? 

The reason is manifest. It is to be found in the 
systematic and unholy effort on the part of some to 
represent that baptism is an outward, earthly ordinance, 
the proper administration of which requires churchly 
environment and priestly sanction; and hence the 
grace of God is sought to be limited by priestly dictum, 
which teaches that in the ordinance, properly admin¬ 
istered under the sanction of the church, grace is 
imparted to the subject, and that regeneration and 
salvation necessarily follow as a result thereof, whereas, 
if this ordinance is not engaged in, the grace of God 
is “frustrated,” and eternal damnation is the conse¬ 
quence. And thus by robbing God of his holy pre¬ 
rogative, a system of priestcraft has been built up and 
maintained which has closed heaven’s doors to untold 
millions of the sons of men. I maintain that if it 
had not been for this unholy effort to wrest the truth 
of God in such a way as to cover up the true Scripture 
teachings upon this most important subject, the real 


THE EUNUCH BAPTIZED 


211 


significance of this passage would have been as man¬ 
ifest as the story of Pentecost, or the call and conver¬ 
sion of Saul of Tarsus, and we should no more think 
of earthly environment in the one case than in the 
other. 

What, then, is the true import and significance of 
this story? In view of what has already been said, 
this is not difficult to discover. It is only necessary to 
follow it in its unfolding in order to ascertain the truth 
taught therein. The person introduced to our notice 
is a man from Ethiopia, “an eunuch of great author¬ 
ity/’ a worshiper of the God of Israel, who had come 
all the way from Ethiopia to worship the Lord God of 
his fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and who, 
although excluded from the “ congregation of the Lord” 
by the terms of the old Jewish law (see Deut. 23 :1), 
nevertheless loved the “gates of Zion” and the “city 
of David.” We can imagine the heart of this man 
longing for freedom from his infirmity, not alone or 
chiefly for earthly considerations, but that he might 
be permitted to enter into the sanctuary of God and 
■worship him in his temple according to the longing of 
the soul as expressed by the Psalmist. But, notwith¬ 
standing he was not permitted by the law thus to do, 
the narrative reveals him in a light which shows that 
God was by no means a stranger to his soul. He no 
doubt took delight in God’s law according to his word, 
which we find him diligently searching, trying, as best 
he could, to understand its teachings. The God of 
Jacob is ever near to such a soul, and will move 
heaven and earth on his behalf. Therefore, passing 
by the multitudes of “Israel after the flesh” who had 


212 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


been thronging his courts with unhallowed feet and 
“uncircumcised hearts/’ and chanting his praises with 
“unclean lips” while playing skillfully “upon an in¬ 
strument of ten strings,” and who had no doubt many 
of them cried out in the presence of the Man of Gali¬ 
lee, “Crucify him, crucify him,”—leaving all these, I 
say, to their “vain worship,” the Holy Ghost waits 
upon this man of Ethiopia, and in the person of Philip 
meets him in “the way that goeth down from Jerusalem 
unto Gaza,” not only to remove his physical disability, 
but to constitute him a “minister and a witness” of 
Jesus Christ and to commission him the first apostle to 
the Ethiopians. 

To this man Philip is sent to bear the message of 
the gospel, and the call of God. Philip addresses 
himself to his task, as recorded, thus : “ Then Philip 
opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, 
and preached unto him Jesus.” From Philip’s presen¬ 
tation of the gospel, the eunuch must have learned 
that the old law, under the provisions of which he 
had been excluded, was now abrogated, done away 
with, fulfilled in Christ Jesus; that the “handwriting 
of ordinances” Christ had taken “out of the way,” 
“nailing it to his cross,” and that Christ was the “end 
of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth,” 
“to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile.” Not only 
so, but the eunuch must also have learned from Philip’s 
presentation of the gospel that “'the Son of man hath 
power on earth to forgive sins, and to cleanse from all 
unrighteousness” (from which the law could in no 
wise cleanse), and that he is able also to make a man 
“ every whit whole,” and that therefore we s.tand “ com- 


THE EUNUCH BAPTIZED 


213 


plete in him.” The induement with or baptism of 
the Holy Ghost promised to all who would believe and 
accept the gospel must also have been spoken of; for 
it is not conceivable that Philip would fail to mention 
these things, together with the incidents of that day 
when, standing in the presence of all Israel on Jordan’s 
banks, Jesus had received from the Father the baptism 
of the Holy Spirit, accompanied by the voice saying, 
“ This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” 

Doubtless Philip recounted all the story of Jesus’ 
three or more years of active ministry, his healing of 
the sick and even raising of the dead, dwelling per¬ 
haps particularly upon the death and resurrection of 
Lazarus, then recounting the scenes and incidents of 
those last days, the mock trial and judgment, the 
crucifixion, the burial, and the resurrection, and 
finally quoting the promise given by Jesus during his 
last conversation with the disciples, namely, “Ye shall 
be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence,” 
and then describing the scenes of the day of Pente¬ 
cost,—the assembled disciples, the “mighty rushing 
wind,” the “cloven tongues” of flame, the wonderful 
induement of the Holy Ghost which then took place, 
and the remarkable gift of tongues,. etc., closing, per¬ 
haps, with . the statement that to his followers Christ 
had given the power to heal, and that many had 
already been made the subjects thereof under the hand 
of the disciples, in the name and through the power 
of Jesus of Nazareth. 

Can it be supposed that Philip neglected anything 
important to the gospel story, or that the eunuch was 
an unwilling or uninterested listener to all of this 


214 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


presentation under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost? 
Or, especially, can it be thought of as possible that not¬ 
withstanding all this representation of cleansing, bap¬ 
tism, healing, in the name of Jesus Christ and by the 
power of the Holy Ghost, nevertheless the eunuch 
caught no higher conception of this whole matter than 
that earthly water baptism was the first and most 
necessary thing to be had? Is not such a conception 
disparaging in the highest degree, not only to the 
intelligence of the eunuch, but to the ability of the 
Holy Ghost so to present the gospel as that a man 
might grasp its import? 

On the other hand, after Philip had thus preached 
the gospel to this man in all its fullness, hacked by the 
power and inspiration of the Holy Ghost,—a message 
which must have stirred his very soul with hope and 
unutterable desire,—thus preparing him for the full 
baptism of the Holy Ghost, and when, such prepara¬ 
tion being fully complete, the Holy Ghost wished to 
manifest himself in all his fullness to the heart, soul, 
and spiritual understanding of this man of Ethiopia, 
are we to receive with incredulity and unholy unbelief 
the thought that he did so through spiritual phenom¬ 
ena rather than through physical agencies? Is it not 
more in harmony with the Scripture representations of 
God’s dealings with the children of men to suppose 
that this manifestation of himself was through miracu¬ 
lous interposition? The fact is, that God never did, in 
any marked way, manifest himself to any person, at 
any time, anywhere, under any circumstances, except 
through supernatural phenomena. Why, then, should 
it he thought even probable that in this particular case 


THE EUNUCH BAPTIZED 


215 


supernatural phenomena were discarded, and that his 
presence must be apprehended, if apprehended at all, 
through the forms and ceremonies of the old law, such 
as earthly water baptism, which, as we have seen, had 
been repealed and set aside as a thing of no worth for 
such a purpose? Is not such a conception utterly vain 
and foolish? 

On the other hand, the exclamation and action of 
the eunuch are in perfect accord with human reason, 
in view of the supernatural environments in which he 
found himself. What wonder if, in view of this awe¬ 
inspiring supernatural manifestation which had so 
suddenly dawned upon his vision, and which seemed 
about to envelop him in its mystic wave, as if the 
mighty “river of water of life” itself (which another, 
similarly situated and divinely wrought upon, describes 
as being “clear as crysta’l, proceeding out of the throne 
of God and of the Lamb”) were about to engulf him 
in its purifying waters, he did cry out, in view thereof, 
Behold water (tdob udwp), at the same time command¬ 
ing his chariot to stand still? As well might we con¬ 
clude that he referred to earthly water as he thus cried 
out, as that Elisha referred to a physical manifestation 
when in view of the chariot of fire he cried out, “The 
chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof! ” or that 
the “whirlwind,” the “cloud,” and the “fire” described 
by Ezekiel, when “the hand of the Lord” was upon 
him, as he stood by “the river of Chebar,” were all 
but of earth, or that the “fountain opened to the house 
of David ... for sin and for uncleanness,” or the 
“great light” that shone around Saul of Tarsus at the 
time of his conversion, or the manifestations recorded 


216 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


as transpiring on the day of Pentecost, or the “door” 
that “was opened in heaven,” which John saw, or the 
“ sea of glass mingled with fire,” or the “ river of water 
of life,” or the “tree of life,” or the “city,” the “jasper 
walls,” the “pearly gates,” the “golden streets,” or any 
other such expressions used to set forth spiritual truths, 
were after all but of an earthly character. 

Is it not amazing that notwithstanding we concede 
that all of these scriptural representations refer to and 
are descriptive of spiritual phenomena, we yet fail to 
see or appreciate the stupendous character of the 
miracle here wrought, and are so slow to apprehend 
that this story of Philip and the eunuch contemplates 
spiritual environments and supernatural manifesta¬ 
tions as great as any of these, as evidenced in the 
statement that “the Spirit of the Lord caught away 
Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more”? How 
very like, however, is this mysterious disappearance of 
Philip to that scene upon the Mount of Transfigura¬ 
tion, when Moses and Elias so mysteriously vanished 
from the sight of the disciples, who by the mighty 
power of the Holy Ghost had had their spiritual vision 
so wrought upon that they were able to recognize spir¬ 
itual phenomena. And yet this miracle of transfigu¬ 
ration no more thoroughly reveals the supernatural 
than does this story which we are considering. That 
either Philip or the eunuch could at such a time be 
attracted by physical manifestation or environment 
would be as improbable as that Peter, James, or John 
could have become interested in earthly matters while 
gazing upon the transfigured form of Jesus upon the 
mount, or that the shepherds on Bethlehem’s plain 


THE EUNUCH BAPTIZED 


217 


could have given ear to earthly music while the an¬ 
gelic choir chanted in their hearing the sweet melodies 
of redemption’s song. 

That only the eunuch is said to have been baptized 
at this time, notwithstanding both were equally over¬ 
whelmed in this mighty wave of divine glory, is not at 
all remarkable. Philip was already filled with the 
Holy Ghost, and was hence fully baptized. Indeed, 
Philip was the center and circumference of this whole 
manifestation. Here in a remarkable degree was be¬ 
ing fulfilled the saying of Christ, “ He that believeth 
on me, .... out of his belly shall [ mark the word 
shall ] flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he 
of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should 
receive.) ” Philip was full of this Holy Spirit; Christ 
therefore had said- that it should flow out of him. 
Were Christ’s words here being fulfilled, and was the 
water in which the eunuch so suddenly found himself 
enveloped and submerged this same Holy Ghost oper¬ 
ating in and flowing from Philip, in a spiritual sense, 
even as Christ predicted it should? Certainly. And 
is this the same Holy Ghost referred to in the Bible as 
water? We have seen that it is. Can any person, then, 
truthfully assume that the water which the eunuch 
here saw flowing all about him and with which he de¬ 
sired to be baptized was earthly in character, when the 
fact was that he was standing in the immediate 
presence of the “river of the water of life,” which had 
thus graciously flowed out to him, namely, the fullness 
of this all-pervasive Spirit of God, which was about to 
overwhelm him in its purifying flood? How weak 
and insignificant is earthly water made to appear, in 


218 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


comparison with this “ river of God,” this stream of 
divine grace and cleansing, into which we know this 
man of Ethiopia to have been plunged at this time to 
his complete and everlasting baptism. How thoroughly 
in harmony with every other representation of Scrip¬ 
ture is this passage made to appear by this conception, 
whereas, as we have seen, the conception that earthly 
water baptism is the thing here talked about contro¬ 
verts every other utterance and precedent set forth in 
God’s Word, as handed down to us by those who rep¬ 
resented the gospel of Jesus Christ, which proves most 
conclusively that water baptism is not the baptism 
contemplated in this story. 

The fact that Philip and the eunuch are said to have 
gone “down . . . into the water” by no means invali¬ 
dates the argument here made.- The sinner may 
make no bodily movement toward Christ and yet be 
truthfully said to be merged into or buried or baptized 
into Christ. It is said of the disciples, as they wit¬ 
nessed that wondrous spiritual phenomenon upon the 
Mount of Transfiguration, and as the cloud was about 
to overshadow and overwhelm them, that they “feared 
as they entered into the cloud” (Luke 9:34). There 
is no thought in the mind of any that the disciples 
here made any physical movement toward the cloud. 
That they were wholly inactive and very much terri¬ 
fied as it came upon them, is very plainly set forth. 
Indeed, it is declared that they knew not what they 
were saying, and it may well be assumed that they 
were equally ignorant of what they were doing. All 
this is evidence that they were being wrought upon by 
supernatural influences. As it was in the case of the 


THE EUNUCH BAPTIZED 


219 


disciples on that occasion, so no doubt was it here in 
the case of the eunuch. How is it possible that he 
should be fully aware of the tremendous significance 
of all that was here transpiring? His sudden ejacu¬ 
lation and the halting of the chariot in the presence 
of this mysterious phenomenon indicate his mental 
condition. Indeed, it would have been simply impos¬ 
sible for him to remain undisturbed under the circum¬ 
stances. 

That Philip and the eunuch both entered into, or, 
as it is in the translation, “went down both into the 
water,” is true ; but there is no more necessity for sup¬ 
posing that any physical act or movement was engaged 
in by them, such as making their way towards and 
plunging into this miraculous water manifestation, 
than there is for believing that the disciples, on the 
Mount of Transfiguration, plunged into the cloud of 
their own motion. They evidently did nothing of the 
kind. On the contrary, the cloud is said to have over¬ 
shadowed or overwhelmed them, and yet it is spoken 
of as if they had done the entering in. The same 
thing is manifest in the familiar statement that the 
*‘sun stood still.” A proper conception of this matter 
by no means necessitates the thought of its actuality, 
but the phenomenon was of such character as that the 
statement truthfully represents man’s experience in 
this matter. 

As it was with the disciples in the case referred to, 
so no doubt was it in the case of Philip and the 
eunuch. In both instances they were enveloped in 
the mighty, overshadowing presence of God, even as 
was the camp of Israel in the olden time. What mat- 


220 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


ters it that in one case the presence of God was mani¬ 
fested under the form or through the medium of a 
“pillar of fire,” and in another simply by a “bright 
cloud,” while in a third the form taken or the medium 
employed was that of water? Is it beyond belief that 
these, one and all, and equally, do but represent the 
overwhelming presence of God’s Holy Spirit? That 
the Holy Ghost was present on this occasion in all 
his regenerating power, is manifest, and will not be 
denied. Why, then, should it be thought a thing 
incredible that God should on this occasion manifest 
himself under the form of water? especially when in 
numerous passages of Scripture he is referred to as 
“water,” or as “the river of water of life,” or as 
the “fountain of living waters,” of which all men 
are invited to come and partake ? It certainly 
appears that this is the most true and natural con¬ 
ception possible. 

There is hence no necessity for supposing that the 
water here spoken of is earthly water. Nay ; I confi¬ 
dently affirm that it was not, but that it was “the 
water of life”—the Holy Spirit of God. In view of 
this conception, there is no reason for supposing that 
Philip and the eunuch even alighted from the chariot. 
Nothing of this kind is necessarily inferred from the 
statement that they “went down both into the water.” 
There was really no necessity for their doing so. In 
all probability such action on their part was rendered 
entirely impossible. 

If we recall the “ rushing mighty wind ” on the day 
of Pentecost, and the suddenness of its appearance, 
and the like manifestations at the home of Cornelius, 


THE EUNUCH BAPTIZED 


221 


and also the suddenness of the appearance of that 
wondrous heavenly phenomenon to the shepherds 
upon the plains of Bethlehem on the night of the 
Saviour’s birth, or the passage of the cloud upon the 
mount, or the onrush and disappearance of the “char¬ 
iot of fire” in the translation of Elijah, and many 
other scenes and incidents of like character which 
might be mentioned, all of which bear testimony to 
the fact that the special and extraordinary manifesta¬ 
tions of the divine presence were always of a very 
sudden character, even as it is to-day in the exper¬ 
ience of those born of the Holy Ghost, we shall 
become convinced that the appearance of God to 
this man was in all probability no exception to the 
general rule. 

Not only Philip and the eunuch were enveloped, 
wrapped up, submerged, in this wave of divine pres¬ 
ence, this “ river of water of life,” but in all probability 
the chariot, horses, and horsemen were all swallowed 
up together, even as we have seen. The men who 
journeyed with Saul of Tarsus at the time of his 
miraculous conversion were all enveloped in that 
mighty wave of divine light emanating from the pres¬ 
ence of the glorified Jesus, as witnessed by the fact 
that they all fell to the ground. Many who came 
within the radius of the influence of the Holy Spirit, 
as manifested in Christ while in the flesh, were made 
to cry out under its influence, “Hosanna to the son of 
David,” etc. Christ’s reply to those who wished him 
to rebuke his followers, and even the little children, for 
thus crying out under the mighty pressure of the 
divine influence that emanated from him, “If these 


222 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


should hold their peace, the stones would immediately 
cry out,” hut shows the mightiness of the influence 
emanating from those indued with the Holy Ghost. 
To touch hut the “hem of his garment” drew virtue 
from the Christ to the healing of the woman ; and 
Peter was so mightily indued with the Holy Spirit that 
even his shadow falling upon some was said to have 
healing power. All of this but shows what Christ 
meant when he said, “Out of his belly [inward parts] 
shall flow rivers of living water.” It was the Spirit of 
God emanating thus from Philip that so affected the 
eunuch that he cried out in its presence, as stated in 
the record. 

We thus see that earthly water is in no sense neces¬ 
sary to a proper apprehension of this passage. Nay, 
more, we have seen that, viewed from any true and 
legitimate standpoint, water is wholly impossible 
thereto. The only way that water baptism can be 
foisted into this passage, or into the gospel narrative, 
is to show that the old Scriptures assigned it a place in 
the prophetic horoscope of the Christian dispensation, 
and that it was industriously taught, both by precept 
and example, by all those who were the exponents of 
the new religion, John the Baptist and Christ himself 
not excepted. But when we find that the exact oppo¬ 
site to all this is true, and that not in a single 
instance, from Genesis to Malachi, is there the slightest 
hint or whisper that water baptism should in any way 
characterize the new dispensation, or have any part or 
place therein; and when we find that there is not, from 
Matthew to the close of the Book, from John the Bap¬ 
tist to John the Revelator, a single representative of 


THE EUNUCH BAPTIZED 


223 


the Christian religion who makes any reference thereto 
in any way, except to condemn, repudiate, and over¬ 
throw it, we begin to realize that a most gigantic fraud 
has been perpetrated upon the church of Jesus Christ, 
from which it becomes all her true friends to seek to 
rid her while yet the power or opportunity to do so 


remains. 


CHAPTER XIII 

SAUL OF TARSUS BAPTIZED 

The wondrous manifestations of God’s presence as 
exhibited in the story of Philip and the eunuch and 
others which we have been contemplating, have, I 
trust, prepared us to receive without prejudice the 
truth involved in the narrative of the miraculous ap¬ 
pearance of the glorified Jesus to Saul of Tarsus, and 
the supernatural phenomenon incident to his call and 
baptism, as recorded in Acts 9 : 3-18. That there was 
no substantial difference between the circumstances 
surrounding the call and baptism of the eunuch and 
that of Saul, we have already seen. Both involved 
the miraculous appearance of Jesus in such form and 
manner and through such agencies as he himself chose, 
by which these two persons might be pressed into his 
service. That they differed in detail, while presenting 
the same general characteristics of miraculous interpo¬ 
sition, may be readily conceded without in any way 
raising the question of precedence or superiority. It is 
enough to know that both manifestations were equally 
miraculous and entirely impossible of being attributed 
to natural phenomena, and hence not to be judged by 
any ordinary rule of interpretation by which physical 
facts may be established. 

But not alone in the experiences attending the call 
and baptism of the eunuch does this story of the mirac- 

224 


SAUL OF TARSUS BAPTIZED 


225 


ulous baptism of Saul of Tarsus find a counterpart, but 
the supernatural manifestation attending the baptism 
of the eleven with the Holy Ghost, according to the 
promise of Christ, on the day of Pentecost, here finds 
reduplication. 

In order to grasp the full significance of the story as 
here presented, it will be necessary for us to understand 
that Saul was passing through an experience similar 
(in so far as baptism is concerned) to that through 
which the disciples themselves passed when the prom¬ 
ise of Christ to them, namely, “Ye shall be baptized 
with the Holy Ghost,” was being realized. Saul of 
Tarsus was here and now being called by Christ to the 
office of one of the “twelve apostles of the Lamb,” 
from which apostleship Judas, by transgression, fell. 
The prophecy made so long ago relative to this matter, 
namely, “His bishoprick let another take,” was here 
and now having its complete and only fulfillment. 

That Paul was a vessel chosen from his mother’s 
womb, and at this time commissioned an apostle to 
bear the name of Jesus of Nazareth “before the Gen¬ 
tiles, and kings, and the children of Israel,” is declared. 
Being about to enter upon this great work to which the 
Lord, even Jesus, was now calling him, he must needs 
be indued with power from on high, namely, the bap¬ 
tism of the Holy Ghost, in order that he might be 
equipped for his work and office in like fashion as were 
the other apostles to whom Christ had intrusted the 
task of laying broad and deep the foundation of his 
church in the world. This induement of power, this 
baptism of the Holy Ghost, was now about to be con¬ 
ferred upon Saul; hence all this gathering together of 

15 


226 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


supernatural forces which, throughout all the history 
of God’s dealings with his people, had always been 
employed whenever special honors were to be conferred 
upon those whom God had chosen as his especial rep¬ 
resentatives on earth and among men. Through this 
special anointing Paul was not only raised to the apos- 
tleship, but he himself declares that he was “not a 
whit behind the very chiefest apostles”—a statement 
which by no means could have been truthfully made 
had aught of the power conferred upon the other disci¬ 
ples on the day of Pentecost been withheld from him 
at this time. 

All of this will prepare us to receive without preju¬ 
dice the truth declared in the gospel story, that the 
baptism of Paul was far other than a mere earthly 
water baptism—that it was in fact that which the 
narrative declares it to have been, namely, a baptism 
of the washing away of sins and the filling of the 
Holy Ghost, just as in the case of the other apostles. 
This is fully set forth in the charge given by Christ to 
Ananias, and by him repeated to Saul, as follows : 
“And Ananias went his way, and entered into the 
house; and putting his hands on him, said, Brother 
Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in 
the way as thou earnest, hath sent me, that thou 
mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy 
Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes as it 
had been scales : and he received sight forthwith, and 
arose, and was baptized” (Acts 9 : 17, 18). Or as it 
is in Acts 22: 12-16: “And one Ananias . . . came 
unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, 
receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up 


SAUL OF TARSUS BAPTIZED 


227 


upon him. And he said, . . . And now why tarriest 
thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, 
calling on the name of the Lord.” 

In the statement contained in the ninth chapter we 
learn that the purpose of Christ in sending Ananias to 
Saul was twofold: first, that he might receive his 
sight, and, second, that he might be filled with the 
Holy Ghost. That the first of these, namely, recovery 
of sight, was immediately experienced by Saul is 
specifically stated. But to our amazement, the second 
purpose of Christ, which by all odds would seem to be 
of the greater worth and importance, finds no record of 
its fulfillment. 

If Saul was “ filled with the Holy Ghost,” as we have 
a right to expect, from the declaration of Ananias, that 
he would be, the inspired writer by some chance or for 
some unaccountable reason has failed to make a note of it. 
This is, to say the least, very strange. But let us look 
again and more closely. We find that there was an¬ 
other occurrence than that of recovery of sight. Is it 
possible that what is said to have transpired is, after 
all, that which was contemplated in this second state¬ 
ment, that he should be “filled with the Holy Ghost”? 
Let us see. He was promised recovery of sight and to 
be filled with the Holy Ghost. He did receive his 
sight, according to the first specification, “and arose, 
and was baptized.” What! Is it possible that, after 
all, being baptized is a true fulfillment of the promise 
that he should be “filled with the Holy Ghost”? This 
is just what we have been contending for all the while, 
and here it is set forth in such language as to admit of 
no dispute. Not one word is said about baptism in 


228 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


the first instance, and nothing is said about being filled 
with the Holy Ghost in the second. And yet the Holy 
Ghost was the thing promised, and baptism was that 
which was experienced by Saul as the fulfillment of 
that which was promised. Was it? Certainly it was, 
and no honest person can deny it. 

What a striking corroboration is this of the truth that 
filling with the Holy Ghost, receiving the Holy Ghost, 
pouring out of the Holy Ghost, and baptism are all 
regarded in Scripture as the one baptism upon which 
eternal life is made to depend. We find that the 
promise of Christ to his disciples, namely, “Ye shall 
be baptized with the Holy Ghost,” finds no record of 
its fulfillment save in the statement that they were all 
“filled with the Holy Ghost,” whereas the promise of 
Ananias to Saul that he should be “filled with the 
Holy Ghost” finds no record of its fulfillment save in 
the statement that “he arose, and was baptized,” show¬ 
ing most conclusively that inspiration holds one of 
these as the equivalent of the other, whether in actual 
occurrence or in the record thereof. 

If further evidence is yet required in order to show 
that the baptism here occurring was not a water bap¬ 
tism, we have it in Paul’s own statement of the reason 
given by Ananias why the matter of baptism was 
being urged upon him at this time, as given in Acts 
22: 16, already referred to: “And now why tarriest 
thou ?. arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins,” 
etc. No person can deny that the baptism here urged 
upon Saul included the washing away of sins. Is it 
possible that the Christian world, in order to uphold 
the water baptism theory as being proved from this 


SAUL OF TARSUS BAPTIZED 


229 


passage, will accept the old Romish heresy of water 
baptismal regeneration? And yet this is the only 
position consistent with the belief that water baptism 
is the baptism referred to in this passagefor, as 
has already been said, the baptism here urged upon 
Saul was that his sins might be washed away. But 
when we understand that the opening of the eyes 
and the washing away of sins are but preliminary 
to the entering in of Christ, or filling with the Holy 
Ghost, and that all the work from beginning to end 
is referable to the Holy Ghost as the active and 
efficient cause operating to the full baptism of the 
soul into Christ, so that we become like him in 
purity of desire and in holiness of heart and life, 
and that thus we are made into his image and like¬ 
ness under the mighty operating hand of the Holy 
Ghost, not only is the most intelligent conception of 
the human intellect satisfied, but the highest thought 
of God as contemplated in the plan of salvation has 
its full realization. “He shall see of the travail of 
his soul, and shall be satisfied.” In the light of such 
a conception and of such a purpose on the part of 
God, how weak and insignificant does water baptism 
appear! 

There is really no more evidence of the water bap¬ 
tism of Saul than there is of the water baptism of the 
disciples on the day of Pentecost. Indeed, water bap¬ 
tism is rendered impossible in both instances, because 
another was promised and experienced, namely, that 
of the Holy Ghost, which the Scriptures themselves 
everywhere declare to be the one baptism of Christ. 
Consequently there could have been no other baptism 


230 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


contemplated or experienced in either case, because 
the Scriptures declare that there is but one. 

THE SCOPE OF PAUL’S COMMISSION. 

Not only is the character of Christian baptism 
established by the promise of Christ and the expe¬ 
rience of the disciples on the day of Pentecost and that 
of Saul on this occasion, but the same is also fully set 
forth in the commission given at this time from the 
lips of the glorified Jesus, which shows that the bap¬ 
tism to be perpetuated through Saul’s ministry is to be 
identical with that which he himself at this time 
experienced, and which was embraced in the command 
of the Master to the other apostles, namely: “ Go ye 
into all the world, and preach the gospel to every 
creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be 
saved,” etc. The commission which Paul received at 
this time is set forth by himself in that celebrated plea 
which he made in defense of the religion of Jesus 
Christ when standing before the tribunal of Agrippa 
and Festus at Caesarea, recorded in Acts 26 :12-18, as 
follows: “ Whereupon, as I went to Damascus with 
authority and commission from the chief priests, at 
midday, 0 king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, 
above the brightness of the sun, shining round about 
me and them which journeyed with me. And when 
we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speak¬ 
ing unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, 
Saul, why persecutest thou me ? . . . And I said, 
Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus, whom 
thou persecutest. But rise, and stand upon thy feet: 
for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to 


SAUL OF TARSUS BAPTIZED 


231 


make thee a minister and a witness both of these 
things which thou hast seen, and of those things in 
the which I will appear unto thee; delivering thee 
from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom 
now I send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them 
from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan 
unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, 
and inheritance among them which are sanctified by 
faith that is in me.” No person can contemplate this 
summary of the results to be accomplished under the 
ministry and through the witnessing of Paul without 
being impressed with the unity and oneness of the 
agencies employed whereby the purpose of God, name¬ 
ly, the salvation of mankind, is to be realized, whether 
set forth by John the Baptist, by the Master himself, 
or by Peter, James, John, Paul, or any other person 
commissioned and ordained of Christ a minister or 
witness for him or intrusted as a steward with “the 
manifold grace of God.” 

That which was predicated of Paul’s ministry and 
witnessing is here set forth as being identical with that 
which according to all prophecy, as well as the history 
of the fulfillment thereof, was the especial mission of 
Jesus Christ. Eyes were to be opened, ears unstopped, 
chains broken, prisons unbarred, captives set at liberty, 
sins forgiven, and mourning and the “spirit of heavi¬ 
ness” were to give place to the “oil of joy,” the 
“garment of praise,” and “inheritance among them 
which are sanctified” (or baptized) through faith in 
Jesus Christ. Where, I inquire, in such a God- 
devised and Spirit-executed program, does water bap¬ 
tism find a place? Nowhere. The New Testament 


232 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


no more contemplates such a thing than that the blood 
of bulls and of goats and the ashes of a heifer should 
be held a necessary reinforcement to the blood of Jesus 
Christ in taking away sins or in making the comers 
unto God perfect, while, on the contrary, the Word of 
God shows that in no age of the world’s history, under 
any dispensation whether old or new, did God ever 
commission any man to his service without fitting him 
therefor by the baptism of the Holy Ghost. 

To say, therefore, that water baptism was the baptism 
which characterized the inauguration of Paul into his 
office, or which consecrated him to his apostleship, is 
as much of an outrage upon human reason and the 
truth of God as it would be to declare that Adam, 
Noah, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, John the Baptist, 
Christ or his apostles, or any others of the long line of 
those whom God has called into his service through 
centuries past, have been consecrated thereto through 
the ordinance of water baptism. The truth is, that 
not in a single instance, so far as the record goes to 
show, have any of these mighty men of God to whom I 
have referred been ordained or consecrated to their 
work and mission through water baptism. No, water 
baptism is as wholly impossible to this passage as to 
any other which we have examined, and any attempt 
to thrust water into this narrative is not only w T eak and 
silly, but wicked as well, even as is every other attempt 
to add to God’s truth. 


CHAPTER XIV 
THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 

Another instance of Christian baptism as set forth 
in the Scriptures is that of Cornelius and his family, of 
Caesarea, recorded in Acts 10. The preliminary cir¬ 
cumstances leading up to this event are given in such 
minutiae of detail as to be prophetic of some new and 
important revelation. The fact is, that God’s “set 
time” for favoring “Zion” had now come, as “foretold 
by the mouch of all his holy prophets since the world 
began.” The promise of God to Abraham, that in 
his seed should “ all nations of the earth be blessed,” 
was about to be realized ; so also was the statement 
that the heathen should be given to Christ for an in¬ 
heritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for 
a possession, and the promise that “in his name shall 
the Gentiles trust” was to be fulfilled. 

Heretofore, notwithstanding the command of the 
Master, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the 
gospel to every creature,” the Gentiles had been for¬ 
bidden its gracious benefits. The Jews alone had been 
the recipients thereof. The restrictive clause in the 
commission, “beginning at Jerusalem,” had now, how¬ 
ever, expired. Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, Galilee, 
indeed, all Palestine, had no doubt all heard the story 
of the gospel, and even now the mighty “river of life” 
was about to break over the barriers which through 

233 


234 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


the centuries had restrained its gracious flow. All 
these promises of God were about to be fulfilled to 
the Gentiles. But as yet this glorious work tarried. 
Human prejudice was holding back the truth from the 
world. The fiat of God, however, who in the begin¬ 
ning “spake” and “it stood fast,” who had said, “Let 
there be light: and there was light,” was now about to 
send forth “his light and truth” among the Gentiles 
also, according to the prophecies spoken and written 
by “holy men of God ... as they were moved by the 
Holy Ghost.” 

God is often represented as manifesting himself in 
different forms, which, although described in terms 
usually employed to designate the physical and earthly, 
are yet manifestly of a supernatural character, as we 
have seen. Hence we have God manifesting himself 
in fire, cloud, wind, the dews of heaven, vapor, mist, 
water, whirlwind, running stream, or flowing fountain, 
or as clothing himself “ with light, as with a garment,” 
etc. Many of the prophetic representations were to 
have their fulfillment under the Christian dispensation. 
The time had now arrived, therefore, when these 
prophecies were to be realized in actual experience. 
It will no doubt help us to a better understanding of 
them, and of this passage of Scripture which we are 
about to consider, if we will refresh our memory by 
again referring to some of these prophetic utterances, 
in which God is represented as exhibiting himself thus. 
The Psalmist is heard to exclaim: “The Lord is my 
shepherd, I shall not want. ... He leadeth me beside 
the still waters.” Who could be made to believe that 
these “still waters,” beside which the soul of the 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 235 

Psalmist was to be restored, were of an earthly char¬ 
acter? 

Not alone to the Psalmist, however, and to the few 
like him whose souls cried out for God “in a dry 
and thirsty land, where no water is,” were these 
prophecies of a more abundant supply made, but the 
Gentile world was also to be made the recipient of the 
divine favor. Hence we have the following: “ For 

thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will extend peace to her 
like a river, and the glory of the Gentiles [namely, 
Jesus Christ the righteous] like a flowing stream.” 
According to prophecy the time had now come when 
waters were to break forth in the (Gentile) wilderness, 
and streams in the desert; when the dry land should 
become a pool and the thirsty lands springs of water, 
and in the places where dragons lay should be grass, 
with reeds and rushes; yea, when “ all the rivers of 
Judah” should “flow with waters,” and when there 
should be a “fountain opened to the house of David 
... for sin and for uncleanness,” to which all the 
nations of the earth should be invited, and the prophecy 
of Isaiah should be fulfilled, “Ho, every one that 
thirsteth, come ye to the waters.” “And all the Gen¬ 
tiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, 
who doeth all these things.” “And in his name shall 
the Gentiles trust,” etc. Again, “ Behold, the Lord will 
come with fire, and with his chariots like a whirlwind. 
. . . For by fire, and by his sword [the Holy Ghost 
and the Word of God, which is the sword of the Spirit], 
will the Lord plead with all flesh : and the slain of the 
Lord shall be many.” How literally was all this fulfilled 
on the day of Pentecost and at the home of Cornelius. 


236 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


But the destiny of those who seek baptism through 
other agencies, namely, by heathen practices such as 
water baptism, is referred to thus : “ They that sanctify 
[baptize] themselves, and purify themselves in the 
gardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine’s 
flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse [heathen 
idolatrous practices], shall be consumed together” (Isa. 
66 : 17). Here the contrast between the baptism of 
the Holy Ghost, and water baptism and other heathen¬ 
ish practices, as to the effect upon the individual, 
whether as to practice or destiny, is plainly set forth. 

Let us hear also these prophecies: “The Lord hath 
his way in the whirlwind” (Nall. 1:3). “Then the 
Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind” (Job 38 : 1). 
“When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of 
the daughters of Zion, ... by the spirit of judgment, 
and by the spirit of burning [not by water baptism]” 
(Isa. 4:4). (Here the word rendered “ washed ” should 
have been translated baptized; we do not wash with 
fire, but Christ does baptize with fire, for “He shall 
baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire,” 
said John of Christ.) “And the Lord will create upon 
every dwelling place of mount Zion, and upon her 
assemblies [individually and collectively, as repre¬ 
sented by the eunuch, and by Saul of Tarsus, and by 
the multitude on the day of Pentecost and at the home 
of Cornelius], a cloud and smoke by day, and the 
shining of a flaming fire by night” (Isa. 4:5). “And 
it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out 
from Jerusalem ; half of them toward the former sea 
[the Jews under the old covenant], and half of them 
toward the hinder [latter] sea [the Gentile world 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 


237 


under the new dispensation]. . . . And the Lord 
shall be King over all the earth [“righteousness shall 
cover the earth”] : in that day shall there be one 
Lord, and his name one [“one Lord, one faith, one 
baptism”]” (Zech. 14:8, 9). “I will pour water 
upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry 
ground” (Isa. 44 : 3). “I beheld till the thrones were 
cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit [namely, 
Jesus Christ]. ... A fiery stream issued and came 
forth from before him” (Dan. 7 : 9, 10). How exactly 
was this fulfilled on the day of Pentecost and at the 
home of Cornelius. “Let judgment run down as 
waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream” (Amos 
5 : 24). “Behold, he cometh with clouds.” “And he 
showed me a pure river of water of life.” “ If any 
man thirst, let him cofrie unto me, and drink.” “He 
that believeth on me, as the Scripture hath said, out 
of his belly [inward parts] shall flow rivers of living 
water. (But this spake he of the Spirit.)” “Whoso¬ 
ever drinketh of this water shall thirst again : but 
w r hosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him 
shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him 
shall be in him a well of water springing up into 
everlasting life.” “Let him that is athirst come. And 
whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” 

Who can read all of these references to water as 
signifying the outpouring of the Holy Ghost and yet 
believe that when Peter saw this mighty pouring forth 
of the Spirit of God, this “water of life,” upon the 
Gentiles, and when he referred to it as the water that 
could not be resisted or forbidden by any man, he was 
speaking of earthly water, notwithstanding all who 


238 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


heard the word are said to have been filled with the 
Holy Ghost, “the water of life”? Is it not strange 
that we can read of all these mighty manifestations of 
God, in fire, cloud, wind, whirlwind, vapor, bright 
light, or any of the other forms mentioned, and never 
for a moment think that these references are to any¬ 
thing else than to supernatural phenomena, and yet 
when God is represented as making his appearance 
clothed in the similitude of water, or where the term 
water is used to designate that appearance, especially 
if associated with the word baptize, at once we lose all 
mental grasp of spiritual things, and will not be satis¬ 
fied to conceive of the water as being spiritual in 
character, but must refer it to the earthly element, 
notwithstanding there is no term so frequently used to 
set forth the presence of God as is the term water f 
We never think of the “wind,” or the “whirlwind,” 
the “fire,” the “cloven tongues,” the “burning bush,” 
the “flaming sword,” the “cloudy pillar,” the “chariot 
of fire,” the “dove,” or the “light” in which God is 
said to have frequently clothed himself, or any other 
element or agency representative of God’s power or 
personal presence, as being of an earthly character, 
even when associated w r ith the term baptize. Why, 
then, do we always assume when the term water is used 
as that in which God chooses to manifest himself, that 
it necessarily refers to the earthly element, especially 
if associated with the term baptize f Is the water any 
more likely to be earthly in character than the fire, 
the cloud, the wind, the cloven tongues, the chariot, 
the dove, or the light? Why do we esteem these to be 
supernatural phenomena, while holding the water to 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 239 

be of earth ? Can any person explain ? Certainly. 
The answer is simple enough. The whole matter 
shows the marks of skillful manipulation, either 
ignorantly, in harmony with preconceived belief and 
strong prejudice, or designedly, in the interest of and 
in order to maintain and perpetuate the false theory of 
water baptism. 

We see, therefore, that Peter, in referring to the out¬ 
pouring of the Holy Ghost as water, was but following 
the very common and almost universal precedent of 
Scripture. Is it, then, to be thought a thing incredible 
that, in view of this mighty pouring forth of the river 
of God’s grace upon the Gentiles, he should, under the 
inspiration of the same Holy Spirit that had moved 
the prophets to speak of it as water, also have spoken 
of it as such ? Is not the conception that Peter in 
this remark referred to the Holy Ghost much more in 
harmony with the truth of God and with human 
reason than is the thought that at such a time, when 
the very foundations were being shaken, so to speak, 
and when old ideas and preconceived notions and 
former prejudices were being swept away under the 
inspiration of the manifest presence and power of God 
until all were said to be filled therewith, speaking with 
tpngues and glorifying God, yet nevertheless the one 
paramount concern in the minds of both Peter and the 
Holy Ghost was how all these people were to be gotten 
as quickly as possible to some creek, river, or cistern, so 
that they might be dipped or sprinkled in the shortest 
possible space of time ? 

Ought not all of these Scripture representations, in 
which the Holy Ghost and the water are held as synon- 


240 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


ymous, to prepare us to understand the character of the 
work which was about to be inaugurated by God in 
the interest of the Gentile world at the home of Cor¬ 
nelius, the first Gentile convert to Christianity? And 
ought it to surprise us, if, in looking upon the mighty 
breaking forth of the water of life upon these Gentiles, 
Peter should be moved to refer to it as “the water” 
which was not to be resisted, restrained, hindered, frus¬ 
trated, forbidden, or withstood? The Greek word 
xuiXuffat, which in the English is translated “forbid,” 
means all of these, and is the same word used by Peter 
when he says, “What was I, that I could withstand 
[or, resist] \_xwXd<rou'] God?” It is also the same word 
used by the eunuch when he inquires, “What doth 
hinder me to be baptized?” and the same used when 
it is said, “ But John forbade him.” My contention is, 
and I shall prove it from the record itself, that when 
Peter said, “What was I, that I could withstand [or, 
forbid] God?” and when he said, “Can any man forbid 
water?” that he referred to the same thing, namely, 
the Holy Ghost, the “ water of life.” 

THE GOSPEL TO THE GENTILES. 

Peter, being led of God, as the narrative declares, 
departed from Joppa, taking with him six brethren of 
the circumcision, in order, no doubt, that the Scripture 
rule that “in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall 
every word be established” might be fulfilled. That 
these were taken as witnesses (wdiether by the choice 
of Peter or of the Holy Ghost does not appear) the 
subsequent narrative fully proves. 

Entering the home of Cornelius and hearing the 


BETHLEHEM FROM THE NORTHEAST, 


































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 


241 


story of God’s marvelous visitation to that home, Peter 
is made fully aware that his business here is to preach 
to these people the truth of God and salvation through 
Jesus Christ the Lord. Although this was contrary to 
all custom, precedent, and preconceived opinion of 
himself and the church, he yet, “filled with the Holy 
Ghost,” was compelled to hand out the “bread of life” 
and the “water of life” to these people, just as he had 
been accustomed to do to those of his own race and 
nationality. His preaching is recorded in Acts 10, and 
begins thus : “ Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, 
Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons 
[up to this time he had thought that God was a 
respecter of persons] : but in every nation he that fear- 
eth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with 
him.” 

With this brief introduction, he at once entered 
upon the subject for which he had been sent forth 
upon this mission : “The word which God sent unto 
the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: 
(he is Lord of all:) that word, I say, ye know, which 
was published throughout all Judea, and began from 
Galilee, after the baptism which John preached ; how 
God anointed [baptized] Jesus of Nazareth with the 
Holy Ghost and with power [Paul says, with “the 
power of an endless life”] : who went about doing 
good, and healing [baptizing] all that were oppressed 
of the devil: for God [the Holy Ghost] was with him. 
. . . While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy 
‘Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And 
they of the circumcision which believed were aston¬ 
ished, as many as came with Peter, because that on 
16 


242 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy 
Ghost. . . . Then answered Peter, Can any man 
[literally, any one] forbid water [the water], that these 
should not be baptized, which have received the Holy 
Ghost as well as we ? And he commanded' them to be 
baptized in the name of the Lord.” 

Peter’s own account of this matter, as given to the 
brethren at Jerusalem, who criticised his action at this 
time, is both interesting and instructive, and must be 
read in connection with the passage quoted, if we are 
to grasp the true signification thereof. Acts 11: 2-4 : 
“And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that 
were of the circumcision contended with him, saying, 
Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat 
with them. But Peter rehearsed the matter from the 
beginning, and expounded it by order unto them.” 
Acts 11 : 15-18 : “And as I began to speak, the Holy 
Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then 
remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, 
John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be 
baptized with the Holy Ghost. Forasmuch then as 
God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who 
believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, what was I, that I 
could withstand [resist, restrain, hinder, frustrate, for¬ 
bid] [xiolufjai'j God? When they heard these things, 
they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then 
hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto 
life.” 

We have in all this a record of events as mani¬ 
festly supernatural as anything which we have 
considered in the gospel story, whether transpiring 
under the old or the new dispensation. Where, I ask, 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS • 243 

amid such supernatural phenomena does water bap¬ 
tism find a place ? In what part of such a God-devised 
and Spirit-executed program does it appear? Nowhere. 
And there is no more evidence that it was engaged in 
at this time than that the “ blood of bulls and of goats, 
and the ashes of an heifer/’ were employed as a sup¬ 
posed necessary reinforcement to the blood of Jesus 
Christ in order that the sins of these people might be 
washed away. Indeed, there is just as much evidence 
to prove that Peter not only used these things, but that 
he introduced another Lord as an object of worship, 
and another faith in and through which salvation 
might be secured, as that he ordered another baptism 
than that of the Holy Ghost, which is the only baptism 
urged upon mankind in the New Testament. 

Before entering upon the discussion of the main 
proposition, I wish to call attention to an omission in 
tho translation of this passage in the Authorized Ver¬ 
sion, which, although somewhat modified in the 
Revised, is still left in such a condition as to obscure 
the sense originally intended to be conveyed therein. 
I refer to the wording in the remark of Peter, “ Can 
any man forbid water?” In this sentence the definite 
article “the” was omitted in the Authorized Version; 
the Revised, however, has translated it, making it 
read, “Can any man forbid the water?” This is better, 
but still the truth is not fully disclosed. It should 
have been, “Can any man forbid (or, hinder) the 
Water,” because the divine is signified. 

That “water” and ‘'the Water” are by no means 
synonymous must be apparent. The water in Jacob’s 
well, in Bethesda’s pool, or in the six water-pots of stone 


244 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


was “water,” even as is the water in the creek, river, 
or cistern, whether under the pulpit or in the baptismal 
font, but “the Water,” “the water of life,” which is 
everywhere emphasized in Scripture, of which Christ 
says we “must be born,” and with which we must be 
baptized, is not to be found in any of these. 

“what god hath cleansed.” 

In addition to the many passages of Scripture 
quoted in which the Holy Ghost and “the water of 
life” are represented as being one and the same, we 
have further ground upon which to rest our argument 
that the water and the baptism referred to in this 
passage are of a spiritual, rather than of an earthly or 
physical, character in the representations of the nar¬ 
rative itself, which furnishes most positive evidence 
proving our position. The first of these to which I 
shall call attention lies in the statement of God to 
Peter in the “vision,” in which the baptism of these 
people is referred not to earthly water, or to any other 
earthly agency, but to God himself, as the active cause 
thereof, namely, “What God hath cleansed, that call 
not thou common.” There is certainly not the slight¬ 
est suggestion of water baptism here. On the contrary, 
the Gentile world is represented, as to its moral and 
spiritual condition, by the “four-footed beasts of the 
earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls 
of the air.” 

No person will dispute that the conditions which 
God wished to change were moral and spiritual, and 
that hence spiritual agencies must be invoked whereby 
to bring about this result. God, then, according to 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 


245 


his own declaration, must be both its “author and 
finisher.” His own words, “Not by might, nor by 
power, but by my Spirit,” are sufficient to show that 
material agencies were not employed in the accomplish¬ 
ment of this expressed purpose to cleanse the Gentile 
world. Paul says that “by the deeds of the law there 
shall no flesh be justified in his sight,” and that the 
“blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an 
heifer,” or any other feature of the old law could not 
“take away sins” or “make the comers thereunto 
perfect.” And yet this taking away of sins, and this 
perfecting process were the very things needed by the 
Gentiles and purposed to be accomplished by God. 

Not only w T as this the need of the Gentiles, and the 
purpose of God on their behalf, as set forth in the vision 
which Peter saw, but the narrative of its fulfillment 
shows most conclusively not only that spiritual con¬ 
ditions were effected, but that God, the Holy Ghost, 
alone was the active and efficient cause producing the 
result. This is proved, first, by the statement of the 
narrative that “wdiile Peter yet spake. . . , the Holy 
Ghost fell on all them which heard the w T ord.” That 
the Holy Ghost did come upon all these people is again 
manifest from the statement, “And they of the circum¬ 
cision which believed were astonished [not that these 
people were baptized with water, but] . . . , because 
that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of 
the Holy Ghost.” The same thing is manifest in the 
exclamation of Peter, as he witnessed the mighty pour¬ 
ing forth of the Holy Ghost upon these people : “ Can 
any man forbid [the] water?” 

This very remark, I say, proves that Peter referred 


246 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


therein - to the divine, namely, to the Holy Ghost, as 
“the water” which was not to be resisted, forbidden, 
or withstood, inasmuch as had earthly water been 
the thing referred to, any man, and especially Peter, 
could have forbidden the administration thereof, inas¬ 
much as he was in authority. But with the “water 
of life” it was entirely different. Christ himself 
had said, “The wind [the Spirit] bloweth where it 
listeth [or, pleaseth],” and it is not to be controlled, 
hindered, or forbidden by any man or any set of men. 
It was just so here. God wished to “ blow ” upon these 
Gentiles, even as he did upon the disciples themselves 
in the “ rushing mighty wind ” of the day of Pentecost. 
How appropriately could Peter or any other of the 
apostles have asked on that occasion, Can any man 
forbid the wind or fire ? And if he had, would any of 
us be so devoid of spiritual understanding as to sup¬ 
pose that the question referred to the. ordinary wind or 
fire of earth? 

Again, the statement of Peter, in continuation of 
the one already referred to, namely, “ That these should 
not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost 
as well as we,” is another reference to the pouring out 
of the Holy Ghost at this time upon these people, 
which proves the character of the baptism contemplated 
to be that of the Holy Ghost. 

Again, the report of this matter by Peter to the 
brethren of the circumcision at Jerusalem, recorded in 
Acts 11 : 1-39, furnishes the most abundant and abso¬ 
lute proof that water baptism was not the baptism 
which was administered and to which reference is 
made in the narrative. This account opens with the 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 


247 


statement of the fact that “ when Peter was come up to 
Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision con¬ 
tended with him, saying, Thou wentest in to men 
uncircumcised. . . . But Peter rehearsed the matter 
from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto 
them” (Acts 11 : 2-4). 

Let us now give careful attention to this report, for 
the Greek indicates that a very careful and systematic 
resume of this whole matter is being laid before these 
brethren by Peter, even as the narrative itself shows, 
so that we may expect to find water baptism occupying 
a prominent place in this detailed and consecutive 
statement of the scenes and incidents wdiich occurred 
in connection with this remarkable event. But, to our 
surprise, there is not a single mention made of water 
baptism in the entire report, nothing that gives the 
slightest clew to such a thing, nothing which in any 
way would lead any person to suppose that it was 
either ordered or engaged in at that time. Let any 
careful student go carefully over this eleventh chapter 
of Acts, which purports to be a correct exhibit of every 
important event connected with this matter, and see 
how absolutely devoid it is of any reference to water 
baptism. 

I am bold to say, and any unprejudiced examination 
of this report will compel the conclusion, that water 
baptism did not occur at the home of Cornelius. This 
report of Peter’s could not have been silent upon such 
a matter, had it occurred, especially when we consider 
that the baptism of these people was the one important 
event which occurred, and the narrative practically 
asserts that nothing of importance is omitted from the 


248 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


report. To undertake to give a full and detailed 
account of the proceedings of this time, and leave out 
the most important occurrence (for water baptism was 
the most important occurrence if it was the baptism 
enjoined and engaged in), is certainly a thing impos¬ 
sible to the gospel record of an event in which every 
other occurrence is set forth and particularly specified. 
But not only does Peter fail to make any mention of 
this matter, but the remarks of the brethren to whom 
the report is made, on hearing the same, in no way 
indicate that water baptism had any place in the 
narrative of Peter, or that their minds were at all 
occupied with the thought. Indeed, viewed from any 
honest or consistent standpoint, it must be acknowl¬ 
edged that water baptism is impossible to this story. 

While this report utterly fails to make mention of 
water baptism as having occurred at this time, it does 
corroborate the narrative, as given in Acts, the tenth 
chapter, of all that is there specified as having taken 
place; for after relating almost verbatim the prelimi¬ 
nary incidents of the previous narrative, the report goes 
on to specify distinctly the character of the baptism 
which did occur, thus: “And as I began to speak, the 
Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.” 
And how did the Holy Ghost fall upon the disciples 
at the beginning ? Let the Scriptures testify. 

Joel, looking forward to it, and speaking as the oracle 
of God, says, in Joel 2 : 28, “I will pour out my Spirit 
upon all flesh.” This is repeated by this same Peter on 
the day of Pentecost in view of the baptism of the 
Holy Ghost, which he, with the other disciples, experi¬ 
enced at this time. (Acts 2 : 16 et seq.) John the 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 249 

Baptist, looking forward thereto, foretold its character 
by saying, “He shall baptize you with the Holy 
Ghost, and with fire.” Christ, looking forward to 
the same event, describes it by declaring, “Ye shall 
be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days 
hence.” 

Peter here declares that the baptism at the home of 
Cornelius was identical with that which he and the 
other apostles experienced on the day of Pentecost, so 
that he, in this report, declared when he witnessed its 
bestowment that it reminded him of this promise of 
Christ, that th>ey should be “ baptized with the Holy 
Ghost.” But the report does not stop here. The fact 
that Holy Ghost baptism was conferred is reiterated by 
Peter in these words : “ Forasmuch then as God gave 
them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed 
on the Lord Jesus Christ, what was I, that I could 
withstand [or, resist] God? When they heard these 
things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, 
Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance 
unto life.” 

This last remark reveals the reason why Peter went 
over the ground so carefully to these brethren. His 
report was not purposeless. On the contrary, it was 
made with a view of convincing these brethren of the 
truth of that which God had so miraculously revealed 
to himself, namely, that the Gentiles were to be made 
“fellow-heirs of the grace of God,” and be received in¬ 
to the fellowship of the church of Jesus Christ. Such 
a thought had never before dawned upon them, but 
this recital of Peter’s was so plain and conclusive that 
they at once accepted it as the truth of God, and as a 


250 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


precedent governing their future attitude toward these 
Gentile brethren. 

PETER ON WATER BAPTISM. 

But we have still another report of this very impor¬ 
tant matter, made by this same Peter, under entirely 
different circumstances, and at a time subsequent to 
this. I refer to the meeting of the first Christian coun¬ 
cil, held at Jerusalem (Acts 15), at which Peter not 
only assails water baptism, but joins with Paul, Barna¬ 
bas, James, and, indeed, all the apostles and elders and 
the entire church in the utter repeal and absolute over¬ 
throw of the old law of outward ceremonies and fleshly 
ordinances. The remarks of Peter at this time are 
couched in the following language : “ And when there 
had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto 
them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good 
while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles 
by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and 
believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare 
them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he 
did unto us ; and put no difference between us and 
them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore 
why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the 
disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able 
to bear? But we believe that through the grace of 
the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.” 

It is certainly more than a mere coincidence that 
this second report of Peter upon the subject of the 
reception of the Gentiles into the fellowship of the 
Christian church, as manifested in the baptism of Cor¬ 
nelius and his family with the Holy Ghost, is as silent 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 


251 


with reference to the matter of water baptism as is the 
first. Is it not remarkable that, notwithstanding water 
baptism is supposed by the entire church to be the 
one important feature of this day’s proceedings, never¬ 
theless Peter makes two lengthy references to all that 
is supposed by him to be important, and he never so 
much as hints that such a thing as water baptism was 
in any way engaged in? And is it not yet more 
remarkable that, notwithstanding Peter was here citing 
this incident as a precedent which God himself had 
established, which was to govern the future conduct of 
the church in its attitude toward the Gentiles, and was 
seeking to prove therefrom that neither water baptism 
nor any other feature of the old law was to be imposed 
upon them, denominating the imposition of such a 
thing a “yoke” contrary to God’s purpose as manifest 
in this incident and warning the church that its impo¬ 
sition upon these brethren as a matter required of 
them by God would be tempting God, still men will 
not be persuaded that water baptism is not a thing 
ordained of God and especially proved from this inci¬ 
dent? As I have said, this recital is a part of Peter’s 
argument before the council by which he is seeking to 
convince the entire church that the old law, with all 
its provisions, water baptism included, is displeasing 
to God, and its perpetuation will but provoke his 
righteous indignation. 

But while it is true that the citing of the baptism of 
Cornelius at this time as an argument in favor of re¬ 
pealing water baptism and every other feature of the 
old law forever disposes of the whole question of water 
baptism, the same argument most positively corrobo- 


252 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


rates Peter’s other report, already referred to, in which 
he declares that Cornelius and his family were bap¬ 
tized with the Holy Ghost. His remark is as follows : 
“And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them 
witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did 
unto us.” We have already seen how the disciples 
were baptized on the day of Pentecost with the Holy 
Ghost, according to the prophecy of Joel, John the 
Baptist, and the Master himself. 

But perhaps as strong evidence as any that Cor¬ 
nelius and his friends were not baptized with earthly 
water lies in the further declaration of Peter, “And 
put no difference between us and them, purifying their 
hearts [not by water baptism, hut] by faith.” If the 
question were raised as to how the hearts of the 
disciples were purified on the day of Pentecost, not 
only this last statement of Peter would say, By faith 
in Christ Jesus, but all the Scriptures quoted, and 
many more would respond, By the baptism of the 
Holy Ghost. Is it, then, true that the hearts of Cor¬ 
nelius and his friends were also purified in the same 
way? So says Peter. But was there not a “differ¬ 
ence” made? No. While all acknowledge that the 
disciples on the day of Pentecost received only the 
baptism of the Holy Ghost, and that water baptism 
was not demanded of them, all seem to think that 
God did make a “ difference,” and that these Gentiles 
were required to submit to the old ceremonial ordi¬ 
nance of water baptism, notwithstanding Peter says 
in this very narrative that “God is no respecter of 
persons.” 

If, therefore, Peter spoke truly when he told the 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 


253 


brethren of this council that God “put no difference 
between” these Gentiles and the apostles themselves, 
then it is impossible that water baptism should have 
been administered in this latter case, any more than 
in the former; and that it was not administered in 
the first instance, the entire Christian world agrees. 
The promise of Christ, therefore, finds equal fulfillment 
both to the Jew and the Gentile, namely, “Ye shall be 
baptized with the Holy Ghost,” and the “ye” is as 
applicable to the Gentile as to the Jew. We hold that 
this statement of Peter’s, if it stood alone and unsup¬ 
ported, would be sufficient of itself to prove that 
Cornelius and his family did not receive a water 
baptism. 

Peter not only cites the fact that “ God is no respecter 
of persons,” and that he “put no difference between” 
Cornelius and the apostles themselves, so far as the 
matter of the baptism of the Holy Ghost, or the puri¬ 
fication of their hearts, was concerned, but arrives at 
the climax of his argument by declaring that Jew 
and Gentile alike are accepted of him. He does not 
say that they are accepted by the works of the law or 
by any conformity to ordinances, but he states'* the 
truth of God, and the faith of the church as founded 
upon his word, in saying, “ But we believe that through 
the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ w r e shall be saved, 
even as they.” Peter in this position plants himself 
squarely upon the doctrine elsewhere enunciated by 
Paul, namely : “Not by works of righteousness which 
we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, 
by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the 
Holy Ghost; which he shed on us abundantly through 


254 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


Jesus Christ our Saviour ; that, being justified [not by 
water baptism, but] by his grace, we should be made 
heirs according to the hope of eternal life” (Tit. 3 : 5-7). 
“ By grace are ye saved through faith ; and that not of 
yourselves ; it is the gift of God” (Eph. 2:8). 

There are two, yea, three, horns to this dilemma in 
which our water friends find themselves, any one of 
which they may lay hold of. They may say that Peter 
misrepresented facts, and that he did not know what 
he was talking about; or that he spoke the 'truth, and 
that there was no water baptism engaged- in at the 
home of Cornelius ; or they may hold that water bap¬ 
tism was engaged in, but that its administration or 
reception in no way constituted a difference worthy of 
being recorded, or that should interfere with the truth¬ 
fulness of the statement of Peter that there was no 
“ difference ” made ; in other words, that water baptism 
was engaged in, but that it might as well have been 
omitted, inasmuch as it made no difference. 

Which position will our water friends choose ? Will 
they discard Peter’s statement as untrue ? Or will they 
concede that he spoke truly, and that the theory of the 
water baptism of these people must be given up ? Or 
will they still contend that water baptism was admin¬ 
istered by the command of Peter, acting under the 
authority of the Holy Ghost, but that it was altogether 
useless, and might just as well have been dispensed 
with as not, seeing it in no way affected the situation, 
notwithstanding they themselves continue to lay great 
stress upon its observance, in harmony with their pre¬ 
conceived ideas as to the proper mode of its adminis¬ 
tration, waxing so warm in their advocacy thereof as 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 255 

to close heaven’s doors against all those who will not 
subscribe to their interpretation of this matter ? 

But against all such conception and action this 
utterance of Peter’s rises up like a mighty rock of 
eternal truth, against which the angry-crested waves 
of earthly water baptism may surge and swirl, “ foam¬ 
ing out their own shame” in their vain endeavor to 
break down the gospel truth that the only Christian 
baptism is that of the Holy Ghost through the gospel 
of Jesus Christ. 

THE HOLY GHOST BAPTISM THE ONLY BAPTISM. 

The next argument which I shall adduce to prove 
that water baptism was not the baptism referred to 
and enjoined by Peter at this time, lies in the fact 
already so fully established, namely, that having 
received the baptism of the Holy Ghost, no other 
was possible, from the simple fact that there was 
no other. (Eph. 4 : 5.) How is it possible to suppose 
that Peter, acting under the inspiration of the Holy 
Ghost, ordered a second baptism, and that of an earthly 
character, when by the same Spirit Paul was inspired 
to declare that there is but one baptism, even as there 
is but one Lord and one faith ? 

Surely our water friends will not deny that there is 
such a thing as the baptism of the Holy Ghost. If 
this is admitted (and no Christian will deny it), then 
this is one baptism, and hence of necessity the only 
one, because the Scriptures declare that there is no 
other. Where, then, I inquire, does water baptism 
come in, in this case ? Nowhere. Numerous witnesses 
declare that these people had already been baptized 


256 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


with the Holy Ghost, and the Scriptures declare that 
there is no other. How, then, is it possible that another 
was enjoined by Peter or engaged in by his authority ? 
Surely our friends are getting into very deep water, 
sufficiently so to be dangerous even to an immersionist, 
to say nothing of the sprinkleites. 

But the Scriptures not only declare that there is but 
one baptism, but they declare with equal positiveness 
that there is but one agency by which this one baptism 
can be effected, namely, as set forth in I. Corinthians 
12 : 13 : “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into 
one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we 
be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into 
one Spirit.” The one Spirit here referred to, with 
which all are baptized, and of which all must drink, 
is the same Spirit of which the Master says we all must 
be born, and it is the same Spirit with which the dis¬ 
ciples were baptized on the day of Pentecost, and 
consequently, as we have seen, the same with which the 
family of Cornelius was baptized. If, then, these people 
had received the one and only true baptism, by the one 
and only agency through which the same could have 
been administered, how is it possible to suppose that 
Peter, inspired by this same Spirit, which is declared to 
be the only administrator of baptism, yet enjoined 
another, not of a spiritual character, but earthly in its 
nature, as all will freely admit it to be? 

Either Paul was not inspired by the Holy Ghost 
when he said that there was but one baptism and but 
one agency of baptism, or else Peter did not enjoin 
another of earthly water, or, if he did, he was not in¬ 
spired to do so, inasmuch as it cannot be supposed 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 


257 


that the Holy Ghost would inspire Paul to declare that 
there was only one baptism, and then inspire Peter to 
enjoin another to be engaged in, notwithstanding 
the one, namely, that of the Holy Ghost, through the 
gospel, had already been most abundantly poured out 
“on all them which heard the word.” Evidently there 
is something amazingly wrong with this whole water 
baptism business. If these positive statements of the 
Scriptures do not prove, first, that Cornelius and his 
family were baptized with the Holy Ghost, and, second, 
that having been thus baptized no other baptism was 
possible of being enjoined by the authority of any 
person representing Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, 
then it is impossible to prove any fact from Scripture tes¬ 
timony. Indeed, there is no other fact of Scripture 
more definitely proved than this. 

Are all of these positive declarations of Scripture to 
be regarded as being unworthy of belief ? Must every 
high and Sacred truth of God’s Word be prostituted, 
and every passage of the Bible in which the word baptize 
occurs, be despoiled, outraged, and ravished, in order 
that we, like the Jews who crucified the Christ, may 
uphold our own traditions, and that this water-god of 
the heathen may be maintained and perpetuated in its 
usurpation of the office and functions of the Holy 
Spirit of God, and be permitted to continue to exercise 
divine prerogatives in the matter of forgiving sins? 
Were ever infidelity and idolatry more manifest than 
in such action? Surely such a condition of things in 
the church ought to give us the greatest concern. 

Having thus shown by undoubted Scripture testi¬ 
mony that Cornelius and his family had already been 

17 


258 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


baptized with the one and only baptism contemplated 
in the New Testament, or possible of being adminis¬ 
tered or received under the sanction of any person 
inspired by the Holy Spirit, before Peter made the 
remark, “Can any man forbid [the] water, that these 
should not be baptized ? ” and before he is said to have 
“ commanded them to be baptized,” it becomes evident 
that these remarks and this command to be baptized 
could in no way have referred to or embraced Cornelius 
and his family. If this is true (and it cannot be 
denied), then the “these” and the “them” of the text 
must find not only their logical subject, but their gram¬ 
matical antecedent, elsewhere than in Cornelius and his 
family. That they could not be the subjects of a com¬ 
mand which contemplated a future action in baptism, 
must be evident. To whom, then, does this command 
refer, if not to Cornelius and his family? The answer 
is not at all difficult, now^ that we have gotten out of 
the water. 

We have already shown that the sweep of God’s pur¬ 
pose, in this manifestation, reached far out beyond the 
narrow confines of this Caesarean home, and that the 
entire Gentile world was embraced therein. In other 
words, the Gentiles, and not Cornelius and his family, 
were the subjects of this action of God at this time, and 
Cornelius figures in this story only incidentally and 
impersonally, and as a representative of the great Gen¬ 
tile world which was about to be opened up to the 
gospel of Christ. The “these” and the “them” of the 
text, therefore, refer specially and directly, not to those 
who had already been baptized ( except as illustrations 
of God’s purpose to save the Gentiles), but to the Gen- 


THE BAPTISM OF COKNHLIUS 


259 


tiles as such. Not only is this set forth in the promises 
of God as towards the Gentiles, already quoted, but 
the narrative itself furnishes ample proof that the great 
Gentile world, as such, was in the mind of God when 
he sent Peter forth upon this mission. It was the 
moral and spiritual condition of the Gentiles that was 
exhibited through the figure of the unclean animals in 
the “sheet” of the “vision,” as I have already pointed 
out. It was towards the Gentiles, as such, that the in¬ 
tense prejudice of the Jews and of the apostles them¬ 
selves was directed, regardless of who the persons 
representing the Gentiles might be. It was to the 
Gentile world, as such, that God referred when he said 
to Peter in the vision, “What God hath cleansed, that 
call not thou common.” It was the Gentiles, as such, 
to whom Peter went forth to preach the gospel. 

The surprise expressed by those of the circumcision 
who came with Peter from Joppa was not that a 
certain family had been baptized, but “because that on 
the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy 
Ghost.” The indignation of the brethren of the cir¬ 
cumcision at Jerusalem, who “contended” with Peter 
because of this action, was not that he went to any 
specific home to preach the gospel, but, “ Thou wentest 
in to men uncircumcised” (the Gentiles), was the 
charge. Peter’s answer, “As I began to speak, the Holy 
Ghost fell on them,” refers directly to the Gentiles, as 
answering the charge of the brethren referred to. 
Peter’s report of this matter before the first Christian 
council, already referred to, makes the matter wholly 
impersonal. He does not say that God sent him forth 
to preach to Cornelius and his family, but he does say, 


260 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


“ Ye know how that a good while ago God made choice 
among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear 
the word of the gospel, and believe.” This incident 
of which we are speaking is acknowledged by all to 
be that to which Peter here makes reference, and yet 
Cornelius and his family are wholly ignored, lost sight 
of, in the larger thought that God at this time made 
choice of Peter that the Gentiles might hear the gospel. 
That Cornelius and his family were the persons chosen by 
God through whom this introduction of the gospel 
should be made, by no means makes them the primary 
subjects of the action. On the contrary, we know 
that they were not, inasmuch as the decisions of this 
council could in no way affect them. 

The subject under discussion was not what should be 
required of Cornelius and his family in order that they 
should be eligible to Christian fellowship, but the 
question was as to the attitude of the church towards 
the Gentiles, ahd what conditions were to be imposed 
upon them in coming into the church. It was not in 
the interest of the family of Cornelius that Peter was 
pleading, but of all the Gentile Christians, when he 
argued their admission on the same grounds and con¬ 
ditions as the Jews. He said, standing before this 
council and speaking directly of the Gentiles, “God, 
which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving 
them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us ; and 
put no difference between us and them, purifying their 
hearts by faith. . . . But we believe that through the 
grace of the. Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even 
as they.” Is there any person who would argue that 
“them” and “their” and “they” in this passage do not 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 


261 


refer to the Gentiles, as such, and that the remark was 
not wholly impersonal? We think not. And yet Cor¬ 
nelius and his family were, after all, the persons upon 
whom Peter’s argument is founded. It was God’s 
action on behalf of Cornelius, the Gentile, which Peter 
cites before the council in order to show that God was 
“no respecter of persons,” and that he “put no differ¬ 
ence between us and them [Jew and Gentile].” 

If it be conceded that these remarks of Peter before 
this council were in behalf of the Gentile people, as 
such, and that when he used the words “them,” “their,” 
and “they,” the Gentile world, and not Cornelius, was 
uppermost in his mind, it follows as a logical conclu¬ 
sion that when he said, “Can any man forbid [the] 
water, that these should not be baptized?” and when 
“he commanded them to be baptized,” the reference 
contemplates the same thought, inasmuch as the same 
incident furnishes the ground for both utterances. 

Not alone from Peter do we ascertain that the subject 
under discussion was the Gentiles, but Paul and Bar¬ 
nabas related what things God had wrought, not with 
any private individual, but with the Gentiles, through 
them. James also referred to what Peter had declared 
concerning the Gentiles, and then went on to say that 
“to this agree the words of the prophets . . . and all the 
Gentiles,” etc., closing with the statement, “My sentence 
is, that we trouble not them which from among the 
Gentiles are turned to God.” The attitude of the church 
towards the Gentiles at that time is fittingly set forth by 
Peter himself as he greets Cornelius, “Ye know how 
that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to 
keep company, or come unto one of another nation.” 


262 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


This reveals the whole situation. It shows that prior to 
this interposition upon the part of God in the interest 
of the Gentiles, every tradition, custom, and law for¬ 
bade the contact or association of the disciples with the 
Gentiles. That this state of things would operate to 
“forbid” the water to these Gentiles will be readily 
seen. We hence have the spectacle of the gospel in 
the hands of none but Jews, and them prevented, by 
every consideration heretofore held sacred, from pro¬ 
mulgating it to the Gentiles. 

To the Jews (that is, to the disciples) had been com¬ 
mitted the oracles of God. They were the “stewards 
of the manifold grace of God.” To them had been 
given the “keys of the kingdom of heaven,” with the 
authority conferred in Christ’s words, “Whatsoever ye 
shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and 
whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in 
heaven.” It will thus be seen that the church, as rep¬ 
resented by the disciples, had practically the monopoly 
of “the water of life.” What should they do with it? 
Christ had said, “Go ye into all the world,” etc., but 
every precedent, custom, tradition, and law must be 
broken, if this program is to be carried out. That 
these traditions and customs were but of human origin, 
and were based on misrepresentations of God’s word 
and will, mattered not. They had all the force of law, 
and still bound even the disciples, notwithstanding the 
command of Christ to go “into all the world, and 
preach the gospel.” It must be evident to all that, 
without the interposition of God, the prospect of a 
speedy realization of the desire of Christ that “all the 
ends of the earth” should see “the salvation of our 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 263 

God,” was exceedingly remote. Before these conditions 
could be changed, therefore, not only must some one 
who was recognized as authority, and competent to 
speak the mind of the Spirit upon this matter, in the 
name of God abrogate these old customs and traditions, 
but new laws must be enacted which should authori¬ 
tatively settle this whole matter, so that the future 
attitude of the church might be definitely determined. 

OLD CUSTOMS ABOLISHED. 

It was that these old customs, traditions, laws, etc., 
might be overthrown and forever laid aside, and a new 
order of things established more in harmony with the 
spirit of the gospel, that the Holy Ghost laid hold 
upon Peter at this time, carrying him forth into the 
work. Christ’s mission was worldwide. He came to 
“bind up the broken hearted,” not of the Jews merely, 
but of the Gentiles also. Their eyes were to be 
opened, and their* ears were to be unstopped, and every 
man’s bands were to be loosed. Surely this gracious 
mission ought not to be frustrated. Well might Peter 
say, “Can any man forbid [the] water, that these 
[Gentiles] should not be baptized?” Surely here is a 
movement that might well engage the attention of a 
god. Peter, therefore, inspired to know the will of 
God, and voicing the mind of Christ through the Holy 
Ghost, issued such a command as would make the 
purpose of God fully manifest to the church and insure 
to the Gentiles all the blessings inhering in the gospel 
of Jesus Christ, upon the same ground and terms as to 
the Jews themselves. This is all comprehended in the 
one statement, “and he commanded them [the Gen- 


264 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


tiles] to be baptized in the name of the Lord.” (Let it 
be understood that the Greek word here translated 
“commanded” also has the meaning of establish , decree , 
ordain , constitute a law , etc., and that it is in this sense 
that the word is here used.) 

It was thus that the “metes and bounds” of the 
kingdom of grace in the world were fully established, 
by the authority of the Spirit, upon a broader basis 
than that which had heretofore prevailed, and more in 
harmony with the spirit of the gospel and the mind of 
Christ as manifest in his life and utterance, and as set 
forth in the great commission, as well as in the pro¬ 
phetic utterances as to what should constitute his 
mission and work in behalf of the children of men, 
which up to this time had found no proper realization. 

A NEW EPOCH. 

With the promulgation of this law, however, a new 
epoch dawned upon humanity. That which had been 
foretold of God “by the mouth of all his holy prophets 
since the world began ” was now about to be realized, 
namely, “The Gentiles shall come to thy light, and 
kings to the brightness of thy rising”; “And their 
seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their 
offspring among the people ” ; “ And they shall declare 
my glory among the Gentiles.” 

That which was so dimly shadowed forth as the 
angel of the Lord came at the prayer of Hagar, dis¬ 
closing to her vision the fountain of water gushing 
forth in the wilderness, of whose life-giving stream the 
famishing child Ishmael might drink and live, was 
here being wrought out in real experience ; for that 


THE BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS 


265 


Ishmael represented the Gentile world, even as did 
Isaac the Jewish race, is a fact that will not be dis¬ 
puted. Here also the cry of the Psalmist, as he voiced 
the unutterable longing of the human soul for God, 
finds fitting realization, namely, “ My soul thirsteth for 
thee, my flesh longeth for thee in a dry and thirsty 
land, where no water is.” Here also the vision of 
Daniel was having its fulfillment, namely, “I beheld 
till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of 
days did sit. ... A fiery stream issued and came 
forth from before him” (Dan. 7 : 9,10); or as Ezekiel 
described it, “And I looked, and, behold, a whirlwind, 
... a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself, and a 
brightness was about it” (Ezek. 1:4); or as it is else¬ 
where expressed, “Behold, I will extend peace to her 
like a river, and the glory of the Gentiles like a flow¬ 
ing stream ” ; or this : “ I will not rest until the right¬ 
eousness thereof go forth as brightness, and the salva¬ 
tion thereof as a.lamp that burneth. And the Gentiles 
shall see thy righteousness.” Here also the prophecy 
that “in the wilderness shall waters break out, and 
streams in the desert. And the parched ground shall 
become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water : 
in the habitation of dragons, where each lay, shall be 
grass with reeds and rushes,” was being more fully 
realized. It was here that the mighty “river of life” 
(like the Jordan, w T hich in one sense represents it) 
“flowed over all his banks,” which was to continue 
“all the time of harvest,” or during the gospel age. 
Here the “pastures of the wilderness” were enlarged. 
Here the “fountain opened to the house of David, and 
to the inhabitants of Jerusalem,” only, was being made 


266 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


accessible to the Gentiles also, that their sins and their 
iniquities might also be purged. Here the invitation 
of the olden time might be reiterated, “Ho, every one 
that thirsteth. come ye to the waters.” Also the invi¬ 
tation of Christ made to the Jews was here being 
repeated in Gentile ears, namely, “If any man thirst, 
let [mark the word let] him come unto me, and drink.” 

From this time on, Jew and Gentile alike were 
equal not only in the sight of God, but before the law 
of his church. To Jew and Gentile “the Spirit and 
the bride say, Come . . . and . . . take of the water 
of life freely.” Is it not a shame that all of this blessed 
truth which was given to us who are Gentiles has been 
so covered up by the effort to make this passage teach 
water baptism that but few have discovered the real 
significance of the passage? 


CHAPTER XV 

THE FIRST CHRISTIAN COUNCIL 

Our argument thus far has dealt with the individual 
action and utterance of those who represented the 
gospel of Jesus Christ as its foundations were being 
laid, under the direct dictation of the Holy Ghost, 
whether uttered prophetically or declared through the 
mouth and action of John the Baptist, the Master him¬ 
self, or any one indued with the Holy Spirit, whether 
evangelist or apostle. We now come, however, to the 
first united utterance and action of the church as a 
body upon this subject. This is what is usually termed 
the “first Christian council,” and is, so far as is known, 
the first general utterance of the church, as such, upon 
any specific doctrinal point. 

We have already alluded to this gathering, and to 
Peter’s rehearsal before it of the scenes and incidents 
transpiring at the home of Cornelius, of whom we have 
just spoken. I refer to the passage again, to show the 
object of the gathering, the question discussed, the de¬ 
cision arrived at, and the doctrine promulgated, all of 
which, as might well be expected from the attitude 
upon this question of all Scripture thus.far examined, 
renders our position impregnable. We have shown 
from other Scripture testimony, that the “ Law and the 
Prophets were [only] until John,” and that Christ 
most fully abrogated the law, taking “it out of the way, 

267 


268 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


nailing it to his cross,” and that he taught his disciples 
to disregard its provisions and that he himself did the 
same. We have shown that the disciples, acting indi¬ 
vidually under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, did 
thus ignore its provisions, and that Peter, especially at 
the home of Cornelius, not only ignored the old law 
with its traditions and customs, but ordained that the 
Gentiles should be received into the Christian fellow¬ 
ship of the church and of the Jewish brethren, a thing 
which he declares was, previous to this, an unlawful 
thing. (Acts 10 : 28.) That this action x>f Peter’s, 
under the instructions of the Holy Ghost, was ac¬ 
cepted by the church as the revealed will of God is 
true, and this decree, established by Peter, that they 
(the Gentiles) should be baptized (with the Holy 
Ghost, or) in the name of the Lord, served to give 
them a standing among their Jewish brethren in the 
church. 

But there were those among the Jewish Christians, 
even as there are to-day in the church, who could not 
be made to believe that to be baptized with the Holy 
Ghost was a sufficient consecration for a Gentile 
brother. Something more than this was surely neces¬ 
sary in his case. The blood of Jesus Christ, and the 
baptism of the Holy Ghost through the gospel, must 
be reinforced by the outward forms and ceremonies of 
the law of Moses, or else salvation could not be secured, 
and especially so respecting the Gentiles. This doc¬ 
trine did not fail to secure adherents, and those who 
were willing to publicly advocate its teaching. How 
widespread this belief and teaching was, we do not 
know. But to determine its truth or falsity was the 


THE FIRST CHRISTIAN COUNCIL 269 

reason why the church was called together in this its 
first council, as the following scripture makes fully 
manifest: Acts 15 : 1-29 : “ And certain men which 
came down from Judea [to Antioch] taught the 
brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the 
manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. When there¬ 
fore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and 
disputation with them, they determined that Paul and 
Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to 
Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this 
question. ... And when they were come to Jerusa¬ 
lem, they were received of the church, and of the 
apostles and elders, and they declared all things that 
God had done with them.” 

A PHARISAICAL CLAIM. 

“ But there rose up certain of the sect of the Phari¬ 
sees which believed, saying, That it was needful to 
circumcise them [the Gentiles], and to command them 
to keep the law of Moses. And the apostles and elders „ 
came together for to consider of this matter. And when 
there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and 
said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that 
a good while ago God made choice among us, that the 
Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the 
gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the 
hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, 
even as he did unto us ; and put no difference between 
us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now 
therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the 
neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we 
were able to bear? But we believe that through the 


270 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even 
as they. 

“Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave 
audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring 'what mir¬ 
acles and wonders God had wrought among the Gen¬ 
tiles by them. 

“And after they had held their peace, James an¬ 
swered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me : 
Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit 
the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his 
name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; 
as it is written, After this I will return, and will build 
again the tabernacle of David . . .; that the residue of 
men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, 
upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who 
doeth all these things. . . . Wherefore my sentence 
is, that we trouble not them which from among the 
Gentiles are turned to God : but that we write unto 
them. . . 


AN APOSTOLIC LETTER. 

“Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the 
whole church, to send chosen men of their own com¬ 
pany to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; . . . and 
they wrote letters by them after this manner; The 
apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto 
the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and 
Syria and Cilicia : forasmuch as we have heard, that 
certain which went out from us have troubled you with 
words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be cir¬ 
cumcised, and keep the law ; to whom we gave no such 
commandment: it seemed good unto us, being assem- 


THE FIRST CHRISTIAN COUNCIL 


271 


bled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with 
our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men that have haz¬ 
arded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
... For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, 
to lay upon you no. greater burden than these necessary 
things ; that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, 
and from blood, and from things strangled, and from 
fornication [all heathen, idolatrous practices] : from 
which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye 
well.” 

Here the whole question of the necessity of engaging 
in any of the forms, ceremonies, and ordinances of 
the old Jewish ceremonial law was “ forever settled, the 
great controversy ended, the water line obliterated, the 
idol broken, the Holy Ghost enthroned, the true basis 
of Christian union discovered, a united church ren¬ 
dered possible.” Were this the only passage in Scrip¬ 
ture upon the subject of the utter repeal of the old 
law and its complete abrogation, the fact would be 
abundantly proved. , 

The only possible way, therefore, by which the 
doctrine that water baptism was perpetuated by the 
authority of Christ and his disciples can be saved 
from utter annihilation, and escape the overthrow 
common to all that pertained to the old law, is for the 
advocates thereof to show’that it had no part in the 
old Jewish ceremonial law. But such a showing is 
impossible, not only because human authority asserts 
the fact, but all Scripture corroborates the statement, 
and Paul, as we have, seen, declares, in Hebrews 9 :10, 
11, that the old law “ stood only in meats and drinks, 
and divers washings [baptisms] \_dia<p6ptn$ paTtTi<jno~i<$~\ ) 


272 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time 
of reformation. But Christ being come/ , etc. This 
action of the apostles is in harmony with the declara¬ 
tion of Paul that the old law of divers baptisms and 
carnal ordinances was only imposed until the coming 
of Christ. 

Yet, while this statement of Paul was true, it was 
still true- that until some apostolic decision to this 
effect was rendered, the old traditions and customs 
w r ould be insisted upon by those who were wedded to 
these things and who believed that there w T as virtue in 
their fulfillment. As we have said, it was to settle 
this matter that this conference was held, in addition 
to the statement of Paul, already quoted, relative to 
the temporary character of the rites and ceremonies of 
the old law and of the ordinances relative to baptism, 
etc. Peter declared before this council that nothing of 
the kind was now necessary, and proved his position 
by citing the case of Cornelius and his family,—which 
case we have just considered,—declaring that God had 
bestowed the Holy Ghost upon them just as upon the 
disciples themselves, and arguing that if God imposed 
none of these things pertaining to the old law, for 
them to do so would be nothing more nor less than 
tempting God, and further stating that “ the grace of 
our Lord Jesus Christ” is sufficient to save both Jew 
and Gentile alike. To this statement of Peter, Paul 
and Barnabas and James and, indeed, the entire coun¬ 
cil agreed, and they united in sending letters to the 
brethren in the churches at Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, 
setting forth the fact that the old Jewish ritualistic 
law of water baptism and other carnal ordinances was 


THE FIRST CHRISTIAN COUNCIL 


273 


ill no sense binding upon them, and that they need 
pay no regard whatever to its provisions, and, further, 
that those who sought to foist this teaching and prac¬ 
tice upon the churches not only spoke without author¬ 
ity, but misrepresented the belief and practice of the 
apostles and elders upon this question. This is all 
expressed in the words, “to whom we gave no such 
commandment.” 

Another thing which we learn from this discussion 
and from this apostolic letter is, that these false 
teachers, in their zeal for the old law and for the per¬ 
petuity of these outward forms and ceremonies, and in 
their endeavor to foist these practices upon the church, 
troubled the church. “Troubled you with words,” is 
the exact form of the charge which the apostles brought 
against them. It is no less true to-day than it was 
then, it has always been true, that those who seek to 
foist these old forms, ceremonies, and ordinances upon 
and to perpetuate them in the church by binding them 
“upon the neck of the disciples,” as Peter said, do 
trouble the church more than all other things combined. 
This the experience of eighteen centuries will but 
confirm. 

But not only does this apostolic letter condemn the 
teaching and practice of water baptism (and outward 
carnal ordinances) by declaring it a troublesome doc¬ 
trine, but a matter of much graver importance is 
declared to be the result of such doctrine and teaching 
believed in and practiced, namely, “subverting your 
souls.” Here at last we find the secret of the whole 
matter. The false teaching that these outward forms, 
ceremonies, and ordinances were perpetuated by the 
18 


274 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


authority of Christ and his disciples, was soul-subver¬ 
sive in that day, and surely it is no less so to-day. It 
was because of this fact that Peter assailed the teach¬ 
ing so furiously in this very council, declaring that 
God required nothing of the kind, but that Jew and 
Gentile alike were saved by “the grace of the Lord 
Jesus Christ,” and that to seek to fasten this old law of 
ceremonial observance and carnal ordinances upon 
the necks of these Gentile brethren would be tempting 
God. It was because of the danger to the church and 
to the world inhering in this soul-subversive teaching, 
that Paul and Barnabas, and James, and all the 
other apostles, w T ith the Holy Ghost also, joined in this 
effort to stamp it out. 

If it were not for the fact that this false teaching, 
like every other false doctrine, is soul-subversive, there 
would be no call to oppose its promulgation and prac¬ 
tice. But since the apostles have declared the fact, 
and since the Master himself specifically warns us to 
“beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s 
clothing [that is, in the garb of religion], but in¬ 
wardly they are ravening wolves,” we believe ourselves 
more than justified in reiterating the statement. And 
if we are in doubt as to wdiat might be legitimately 
classed as false doctrine, we have a sure and infallible 
criterion, namely, “Ye shall know them by their 
fruits.” Whose fruits ? The fruits of the false teacher 
and his doctrine; for it is of these, and these only, 
that the Master is here speaking. 

Judged by this rule, and dealt with according to its 
fruitage, there is no tree which so clearly demands 
destruction at our hands as this one ; for no other false 


THE FIRST CHRISTIAN COUNCIL 275 

doctrine has been so prolific of evil fruitage as has 
this. Indeed, as we have seen, this error is the fruitful 
cause of all that is undesirable in the experience of 
the church in the world. 

Take away the false teaching that water baptism is 
the baptism emphasized in God’s message to man, and 
let the church teach and emphasize the baptism of the 
Holy Spirit through the gospel, until Holy Ghost 
baptism shall be as prevalent as is this false, heathen 
rite, and the church in the w r orld will shine to the 
glory of God, and the time will soon come when 
“righteousness shall cover the earth” and when Christ 
shall reign from shore to shore, even as this false'god 
of the heathen now reigns, the world around. 

WATER BAPTISM HEATHEN AND JUDAISTIC IN ORIGIN. 

Notwithstanding this action of the apostles and 
elders in seeking to stamp out water baptism, with all 
else pertaining to the old law, in this first general 
council of the church, we yet find that these old cus¬ 
toms were perpetuated by the common consent of many 
who came into the Christian church, from both heathen 
and Judaistic sources. As we have before said, water 
baptism was both a heathen and a Jewish religious 
rite, and there is no doubt that in this fact lies the 
secret of its perpetuation. This noxious error, which 
was thus brought over from these sources, soon spread 
in the virgin soil of the Christian church, this new 
“garden of the Lord,” so to speak. Into this garden, 
as at the first, the “old serpent” came, and with the 
same specious arguments which he employed in the 
first instance he persuaded this new “bride of heaven” 


276 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


to forsake the “ tree of life,” and the “ water of life,” for 
“ the tree of knowledge of good and evil,” and for the 
waters of the river of death as contained in outward 
forms and ceremonies. 

The “tree of life” is but the figure of Christ in the 
new dispensation, even as the river which “went out 
of Eden to water the garden” (Gen. 2:10) was but 
a figure of the great spiritual “river of water of life, 
clear as crystal,” which the revelator saw flowing out 
of the throne of God and the Lamb, winding its way 
through the midst of the “paradise of God” as a 
mighty “street,” upon which only the redeemed 
shotild walk, and upon either side of which flourished 
the tree of life, even the leaves of which, to say noth¬ 
ing of the fruit thereof, were for the healing (or bap¬ 
tism) of the nations. (Rev. 22 : 1, 2.) But notwith¬ 
standing this abundant provision of God’s grace for 
the spiritual wants of man, the old serpent has, even 
as in the first instance, persuaded humanity to aban¬ 
don the tree of life and the water of life for the “tree of 
knowledge of good and evil,” and for the waters of the 
river of death, until millions of the race are ready to 
declare with Naaman that “Abana and Pharpar, 
rivers of Damascus” (the sacred water-gods of the 
heathen) are preferable to all the “waters of Israel” 
for baptismal purposes. 

All church history is replete with the story of the 
struggle of the early church to rid herself of these 
Judaistic and other heathen tendencies. Not only 
was water baptism a Jewish religious rite and ordi¬ 
nance, but those who came into the Christian church 
from heathendom, whether converted or otherwise, 


THE FIRST CHRISTIAN COUNCIL 277 

came with a strong predisposition thereto, the result of 
long years of teaching and practice. 

That water baptism was, and is to-day, a heathen 
religious rite, all history declares, and the Ganges and 
the Nile and all the other sacred rivers of the East 
fully testify to this fact. Go to any of these sacred 
rivers to-day, and multitudes of poor deluded heathen 
will there be found engaging in the old heathen rite 
of water baptism, in the vain idea that by such means 
they can render themselves acceptable to their gods. 
Such a procedure might indeed satisfy a heathen god, 
but certainly the Lord God of Israel looketh not upon 
the “outward appearance.” Nay, this is the thought 
of man, “but the Lord looketh on the heart,” and is 
a “discerner of the thoughts and intents” thereof. 

“ Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and take away the 
foreskins of your heart,” is the authoritative command 
of God to Israel, through the prophet. 

Water baptism being thus both a Judaistic and 
heathen religious rite, there was, after the death of the ' 
apostles and a few of those who stood nearest to them, 
and who had fully grasped their spirit and teachings, 
no real opposition to its perpetuation. On the con¬ 
trary, both factions favored it, and there being but few 
to oppose it, it very soon came into almost universal 
practice. This was not the case, however, with many 
of the rites and ceremonies sought to be perpetuated, 
whether by the Jewish or Gentile factions. On mapy 
of these there was the widest divergence, both as to 
belief and practice; hence their perpetuation was 
rendered more difficult, and in some cases impossible. 

Even with reference to water baptism, and some 


278 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


other of the more common practices of the church, 
which, as we have said, were borrowed from heathen 
and Judaistic sources, there have always been those 
who opposed, so that there never has been a time in 
the history of the church, even in its darkest period, 
when there were not found those who protested against 
these things to a greater or less extent. This protesting 
spirit, which always came from without the recognized 
body (or if from those within they were soon expelled 
therefrom), was in modern times represented by the 
Waldenses and Albigenses, and still later by the 
Society of Friends, commonly called Quakers, who do 
not observe these ordinances of heathen ancestry, but 
discountenance and repudiate them. Notwithstanding 
this opposition of the few, the many seem to have 
desired the perpetuation of these things in the church, 
so that the doctrine of water baptism has come down 
from apostolic times, with ever-increasing power and 
momentum, to the present day. 

But while all this is true, it is,also true that the cus¬ 
tom has no more sanction in the New Testament than 
has any other of the idolatrous customs and practices 
of that time, some of which have found a place in the 
church. Water baptism can no more claim scriptural 
authority for its perpetuation under the Christian dis¬ 
pensation than such authority can be found for the 
worship of the saints, or their images, or for praying to 
the Virgin Mary, or for assuming that the pope is 
Christ’s vicar on earth, or for that mighty hierarchical 
assumption of divine authority which has drenched 
the earth with blood and rendered life and liberty 
insecure wherever it has held sway. There is no more 


THE FIRST CHRISTIAN COUNCIL 279 

scriptural authority for the perpetuation of water bap¬ 
tism in our Christian system than there is for perpetu¬ 
ating the dignity and honor originally ascribed to 
heathen deities by ingrafting their names upon our 
Christian calendar and thus in a certain sense perpet¬ 
uating their worship. It is a well-known fact that 
these names were foisted upon the church by those 
coming out of heathendom or paganism, and that for 
religio-political reasons, through compromise, they 
were allowed to stand and be perpetuated under the 
sanction of so-called Christian emperors, who had 
themselves come out of paganism, and had adopted 
the Christian religion as a matter of policy and state¬ 
craft and as a means through which their ambition 
might be satisfied. It would be no more absurd to 
hold that all of this was by the authority of the Scrip¬ 
ture than it is to hold that this Judeo-heathen custom 
of water baptism was by divine authority. 


CHAPTER XVI 

OTHER BAPTISMS 
THE BAPTISM OF LYDIA 

We will now speak of the baptism of Lydia and her 
household. (Acts 16 : 15.) Here, as in all the other 
passages referred to, water baptism is not mentioned. 
The only foundation upon which the great superstruc¬ 
ture of the doctrine of water baptism rests, as being in 
any way taught in this passage, is the mere fact that 
the place where these people were accustomed to meet 
for worship upon the Sabbath is said to have been near 
to a river, and that Paul and Silas met with them at 
this certain time and preached the gospel to the women 
who had come together for prayer and worship. 
Among the women thus congregated was one Lydia, 
“ a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, . . . whose 
heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the 
things which were spoken of Paul. And when she 
was baptized, and her household,” etc. 

This is the entire narrative, so far as it affects the 
question, and there is no more evidence that the bap¬ 
tism which is said to have occurred was a water baptism 
than there is that the whole company went bathing 
simply because they were near a river and could have 
done so had they so chosen. On the contrary, the baptism 
which occurred is clearly defined, namely, the preach¬ 
ing of the gospel by Paul and the glad reception there- 
280 


OTHER BAPTISMS 


281 


of by Lydia, under the power of the Holy Ghost, as set 
forth in the statement, “Whose heart the Lord opened, 
that she attended unto the things w T hich were spoken of 
Paul.” This is in exact harmony with the terms of 
the commission, namely, “Go ye therefore, and teach 
all nations, baptizing them [how? in earthly water? 
no, but] in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the Holy Ghost.” This is exactly what Paul 
did. 

According to this Scripture, Lydia is said to have 
“attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.” 
Did Paul talk about water baptism to this woman 
and to those assembled with her for prayer that Sab¬ 
bath day ? To say so is to grievously misrepresent the 
truth and cover up from human understanding the 
things necessary to salvation. How is it possible to 
suppose that Paul here urged water baptism upon 
this woman, when we have just seen that he, together 
with Barnabas, and Peter, and James, and others of the 
apostles and elders, with the entire council at Jerusa¬ 
lem, had utterly repudiated the same, and had united 
with these in sending a joint letter to all the churches 
setting forth that these things were no longer in force 
or binding upon the church ? Such an assumption is 
an impeachment of the honesty and consistency of the 
great apostle to the Gentiles, and is hence a libel upon 
his good name, as well as a direct insult to Christ, who 
declares that his baptism is wrought by the power of 
the Holy Ghost through the gospel. The opening of 
Lydia’s heart, her glad reception of the gospel, and her 
baptism into Christ are in the narrative all referred to 
the divine operator, “the Lord,” and water baptism 


282 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


finds no more authority in this scripture than in any 
other examined. 

THE PHILIPPIAN JAILOR BAPTIZED. 

The next mention of baptism is that of the Philippian 
jailor. (Acts 16 : 23-34.) This incident has furnished 
a battle-ground upon which the great opposing factions 
of water baptists have rallied their forces all through 
the centuries. But, like all the other passages con¬ 
sidered, water baptism is not spoken of, or in the 
slightest measure hinted at. The only water men¬ 
tioned in this passage is that which the jailor is said to 
have used in washing the lacerated backs of Paul and 
Silas after they had been so barbarously beaten, as the 
record specifies. 

The baptism which did occur, however, is most 
clearly defined, and is in exact harmony with the gos¬ 
pel record and with the great commission itself. “ Then 
he [the jailor] called for a light, and sprang in, and 
came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, 
and brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do 
to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord 
Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. 
And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and 
to all that were in his house. And he took them the 
same hour of the night, and washed their stripes ; and 
was baptized, he and all his, straightway.” Here, as 
everywhere else, according to the terms of the commis¬ 
sion, the gospel is first preached. “And they spake 
unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in 
his house.” Here the teaching ordered by Christ as 
the only instrumentality through which baptism was 


PATJIi AND SILAS IN THE PHILIPPIAN JAIL 




I 


I 



i i 


















































































































































































































































































































OTHER BAPTISMS 


283 


possible of being effected, was most punctiliously ob¬ 
served. And did baptism follow as a necessary result? 
Certainly. And were they neither sprinkled, nor 
poured, nor immersed with or in earthly water? No. 
There is no more evidence of such a thing than that 
they were all baptized in or with earthly blood. 

Paul, as we have seen, had wholly repudiated the 
old law of ceremonial purification by water and blood 
of an earthly character, and was, in the room and 
place of these, everywhere setting forth Jesus Christ as 
both the “water and the blood,” and faith in him as 
the only “propitiation for our sins.” There is just as 
much evidence to show that the supper to which they 
sat down was the old Jewish paschal supper, as there is 
to show that water baptism was the baptism engaged 
in. On the contrary, this scene is set forth in such 
language as to convince any thoughtful mind that a 
supernatural phenomenon was here as manifest as up¬ 
on any other occasion of baptism spoken of in the > 
gospel record, Pentecost itself not excepted. Let us re¬ 
call the scene : “ And at midnight Paul and Silas 

prayed, and sang praises unto God : and the prisoners 
heard them. And suddenly there was a great earth¬ 
quake, so that the foundations of the prison were 
shaken : and immediately all the doors were opened, and 
every one’s bands were loosed.” Who can read all 
this in connection with the effect produced upon the 
jailor himself, already mentioned, and fail to recog¬ 
nize the presence of the mighty Spirit of God as fully 
and overwhelmingly as anywhere else in all the record ? 

What was all this manifestation for? Simply to 
release Paul and Silas? This could have been done as 


284 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


quickly and as silently as when Peter was released from 
like imprisonment, had God so chosen. But a baptism 
was to be accomplished, and the narrative of the pres¬ 
ence of the great Baptizer is no doubt given to corrob¬ 
orate the great truth everywhere held forth in Scripture, 
namely, that the baptism here spoken of was the same 
as that which occurred on the day of Pentecost, or as 
that of the eunuch, or of Saul of Tarsus, or of Cornelius, 
or as any other of the mighty baptisms of the Holy Ghost 
of which the gospel speaks. Again earthly water bap¬ 
tism fails to materialize, and the Holy Ghost in all his 
mighty power is left in undisputed possession of the 
honors to be ascribed to the baptism which was here 
accomplished. 


CRISPUS BAPTIZED. 

At Corinth we find Paul, as ever, preaching the 
word of the Lord, and the gospel of salvation through 
him. Among those who heard and accepted the gos¬ 
pel and were brought under its mighty influence, and, 
believing, were thus truly baptized, w T ere Crispus, chief 
ruler of the synagogue, and all his house; and many 
others believing were said to have been baptized, of 
course through the gospel under the power of the Holy 
Ghost, as nothing else is either intimated or possible. 

APOLLOS AT EPHESUS. 

At Ephesus we find an incident occurring which it 
is important to notice. “And a certain Jew named 
Apollos, born at Alexandria, . . . taught diligently 
the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of 
John” (Acts 18:24, 25). 


OTHER BAPTISMS 


285 


This is the first Scripture instance recorded in which 
one preaching the gospel was himself unbaptized with 
the baptism of Christ. This man, it is declared, had 
been baptized only unto, or to the extent of, John’s bap¬ 
tism ; that is, the Holy Spirit had operated upon his 
heart and soul to the extent of “ repentance and 
remission of sins,” which, as we have seen, is every¬ 
where called John’s baptism. This was as far as his 
experience had gone in the matter of religion and 
Christianity. He had not, as yet, received the anoint¬ 
ing of the Holy Ghost, the indwelling Christ, which is 
the ultimate baptism. Yet, notwithstanding he lacked 
divine power and the wisdom which is consequent 
upon the unction of the Holy Ghost, he was an “elo¬ 
quent man, and mighty in the Scriptures,” and was 
“instructed in the way of the Lord [to the extent spec¬ 
ified ] ; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and 
taught diligently . . . and mightily convinced the 
Jews, and that publicly, showing by the Scriptures ( 
that Jesus was Christ.” 

This man found friends in a certain couple, who, 
perceiving his ability, and yet seeing that he was 
ignorant as to the higher baptism, explained to him 
“the way of God more perfectly.” And inasmuch as 
it is stated that it was upon the subject of baptism 
that he was ignorant, it is but fair to presume that it 
was upon this subject that he was instructed, since he 
knew only the baptism of John, which had now been 
reinforced by the full baptism of Christ, namely, that 
of the indwelling Holy Ghost. It is said that Apollos 
was ignorant of all this, and that he was quickly in¬ 
structed by his friends, Priscilla and Aquila, as to the 


286 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


new order of things and the higher and ultimate bap¬ 
tism ; and their haste in the matter but shows the 
importance attached to the new and fuller baptism by 
these devout souls. 


PAUL AT EPHESUS. 

The next incident recorded is set forth in these 
words : “And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at 
Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts 
came to Ephesus : and finding certain disciples, he 
said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost 
since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have 
not so much as heard whether There be any Holy 
Ghost. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye 
baptized ? And they said, Unto John’s baptism. Then 
said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of 
repentance, saying unto the people, that they should 
believe on him which should come after him, that is, 
on Jesus Christ. When they heard this, they were 
baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when 
Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost 
came on them ; and they spake with tongues, and 
prophesied. And all the men were about twelve ” 
(Acts 19 :1-7). 

There is in this passage and in the remark of Paul 
the most absolute proof that the receiving of the Holy 
Ghost and Christian baptism are one and the same 
thing. How does it come that when Paul made the 
inquiry of these Ephesians, “Have ye received the 
Holy Ghost since ye believed?” and when they 
made reply, “We have not so much as heard whether 
there be any Holy Ghost,” Paul immediately in- 


OTHER BAPTISMS 


287 


quired, “Unto what then were ye baptized?” What 
connection is there between receiving the Holy Ghost 
and baptism? Evidently very much, in Paul’s mind, 
at least. Indeed, it is evident that Paul referred to 
the baptism of the Holy Ghost, when he made the in¬ 
quiry, “Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye 
believed?” We have only to remember the commis¬ 
sion, and the remark of Christ, “ He that believeth and 
is baptized shall be saved,” in order to understand this 
inquiry of Paul. It was, substantially, Have you been 
baptized with the Holy Ghost? or, Has the Holy Ghost 
been poured out upon you since ye believed? 

Paul no doubt had met others who were resting in 
the thought that belief and the “ baptism of repentance 
for the remission of sins,” which John preached, were 
sufficient, and who had never heard, even as these had 
not, of anything further being necessary. But Paul 
was anxious that all should experience the promise of 
Christ, namely, salvation. It was their birthright, i 
There was no good reason why, having been baptized 
with John’s baptism of repentance, they should yet 
fail of the great salvation in consequence of not having 
been baptized with the baptism upon which Christ had 
made salvation depend, namely, that purity which is 
the result of the reception and indwelling of the Holy 
Ghost; so that when these disciples expressed them¬ 
selves as not having received this baptism, he at once 
instructed them as to the inadequacy of John’s bap¬ 
tism of repentance, and, at their request, conferred 
upon them the Holy Ghost baptism, which alone was 
the fulfillment of the commission of Christ, “baptizing 
them in the name of the Father,” etc., and although 


288 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


Paul here exceeded his instructions in the matter of 
the laying on of his hands, this was not allowed to 
stand as a bar to the gracious outpouring of the Holy 
Ghost upon these willing recipients thereof. 

WHY THESE TWELVE HAD NOT BEEN BAPTIZED. 

That these twelve men whom Paul here found at 
Ephesus, and who were said to have been ignorant of 
the cleansing of the Holy Ghost, were persons who had 
heard the gospel from the lips of some teacher who 
was himself ignorant upon this matter, is evident. It 
is quite likely it was this same Apollos, of whom we 
have been speaking, as he is said to have been preach¬ 
ing at Ephesus, and to have just gone to Corinth a 
short while before Paul arrived at Ephesus. But who¬ 
ever it was that had taught these men, the fact is 
clearly stated that they were entirely ignorant of the 
true and only baptism, the one which was alone deemed 
to he the all-sufficient one, namely, that of the Holy 
Ghost. Paul said to these men, “John verily baptized 
with the baptism of repentance.” Here again the char¬ 
acter of John’s baptism is declared to be, not of earthly 
water, but of “repentance,” a soul and heart matter. 

Repentance is a very necessary factor in the plan of 
God in and through which men are to be purified, but 
it is, as we have seen, wholly inadequate. Nothing 
but the baptism consequent upon the outpouring of 
the Holy Ghost, or, the indwelling Christ, is a sure and 
sufficient ground upon which to predicate eternal life. 
“ He that hath the Son hath life ; and he that hath not 
the Son of God hath not life.” Nothing less than this 
should be relied upon by any soul striving for the 


OTHER BAPTISMS 


289 


great salvation. Repentance is all right so far as it 
goes; but repentance and the remission of sins conse¬ 
quent thereupon are not absolutely safe, inasmuch as 
the gracious work of the Divine Spirit through repent¬ 
ance covers only past transgressions. It does not cover 
the sins of to-morrow, any more than paying the debt 
of the past year will exempt us from payment of the 
debt contracted next year. The indwelling Christ 
alone guarantees the soul against loss. 

THE'WHOLE COUNSEL OF GOD. 

There are many other important passages recorded 
in the Gospels and in the Acts of the Apostles which 
it would be interesting to notice as bearing upon this 
subject, but space forbids their consideration at pres¬ 
ent. One of these, however, I wish to call attention 
to. It is Paul’s last personal appeal to the elders of 
the church at Ephesus, recorded in Acts 20 : 17-35. 
“And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the * 
elders of the church. And when they were come to 
him, he said unto them, ... I kept back nothing 
that was profitable unto you. ... I have not shunned 
to declare unto you all the counsel of God. Take 
heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock 
over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you over¬ 
seers, to feed the church of God [with what? earthly 
food? No ; but with the bread of life], which he hath 
purchased with his own blood. [Now comes the 
prophecy which has been so abundantly fulfilled.] 
For I know this, that after my departing shall griev¬ 
ous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 
Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking per- 

19 


290 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


verse things [erroneous teachings], to draw away dis¬ 
ciples after them. Therefore watch. . . . And now, 
brethren, I commend you to [water baptism and all 
the rites and ceremonies of the law? No, no ; but to] 
God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to 
build you up, and to give you an inheritance among 
all them which are sanctified,” etc. 

We have but to recall the commission given to Paul 
at the very outset of his ministry, in order to under¬ 
stand this last statement, namely, “That they may 
receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among 
them which are sanctified [how?] by faith that is in 
me” (Acts 26 :18). Paul’s recommendations as to how 
“ sanctification,” or baptism, was to be had and the 
“inheritance” predicated thereupon to be secured, are 
identical with the instructions given him by Christ 
himself, in the passage just quoted from the twenty- 
sixth chapter. Paul, in the passage under considera¬ 
tion, refers the whole matter of sanctification and 
eternal life to “God, and to the word of his grace.” 
These, he declares, are able to baptize, or to give us an 
inheritance among them which are baptized, or sanc¬ 
tified, which words, as we have shown, are synonymous. 

This statement of Paul, that he had not failed to 
declare unto these people the whole counsel of God, 
can in no wise be true if water baptism has any place 
in the counsel of God ; for Paul never spoke upon the 
subject of water baptism except to overthrow and 
condemn it, as do all other New Testament authorities. 
In what scripture does Paul emphasize the importance 
of water baptism? yea, in what scripture does he 
even hint that it is in the remotest degree a part of the 


OTHER BAPTISMS 


291 


gospel? And yet he tells these brethren in this last 
solemn interview, “ I have not shunned to declare unto 
you all the counsel of God” (Acts 20 : 27). 

I assert, and I challenge any man to show the con¬ 
trary, that there is not a single utterance of Paul 
which can in any way be construed into an endorse¬ 
ment of water baptism. Nowhere, so far as the record 
shows, did he ever speak of the subject except to 
repudiate it as did his great Master before him. Let 
the advocates of water baptism point out where Paul 
ever exhorted any person to be baptized with earthly 
water, or where he ever engaged in the practice him¬ 
self. This they must do, or else hold that Paul spoke 
but the simple truth when he made the statement that 
he had declared unto them all the counsel of God. 
If Paul spoke truly (and he did), then water baptism 
is in no part of the “counsel of God” or of the gospel 
of Christ, inasmuch as he never, anywhere, or at any 
time, under any circumstances, declared it to an'y 
person, so far as the record shows. This one statement 
of Paul is of itself sufficient to show that this doctrine 
of water baptism which has been such a potent cause 
in the destruction of men is one of the “perverse 
things” which he said would be foisted upon the 
church after his departure, by corrupt and designing 
teachers, who would not spare the flock, being “griev¬ 
ous wolves.” ( Acts 20 : 29, 30.) 

We have now, in as brief a way as possible con¬ 
sistent with thoroughness, examined the history of the 
life and teachings of John the Baptist, and of the 
Master himself while in the flesh, in so far as the same 
relates to this question, together with that of the apos- 


292 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


ties, in so far as the same is disclosed in the Gospels 
and the Acts of the Apostles, whether as shown by 
precept or example, yet in all the multiplied events 
there recorded, of the time when the world was being 
stirred by them as they went everywhere, continually 
teaching, preaching “all the words of this life,” per¬ 
forming innumerable miracles of every character, in¬ 
structing and warning every man of all that was con¬ 
sidered of the slightest importance for him to know, 
we have failed to find a single instance anywhere in 
which the attention -of any person was directed in the 
slightest way to the great importance of water baptism, 
or where the same was ever engaged in by any person, 
at any time, anywhere, or under any circumstances, by 
the authority of any person assuming to speak by 
authority of Jesus Christ. That this is an amazing 
statement to make, in view of the universal thought, 
and teaching, and practice of Christendom to the con¬ 
trary, I freely admit. But I challenge any man to 
produce an argument, founded on Scripture, that will 
prove it untrue. 


PART IV 

THE TESTIMONY OF THE EPISTLES 











% 


PART IV 

THE TESTIMONY OF THE EPISTLES 


CHAPTER XVII 

BURIED BY BAPTISM 

We now leave the Gospels and the Acts, and pass 
on to the Epistles, to find what is there said upon this 
important subject. . The first passage that we shall 
examine is perhaps the one passage above all others 
relied upon as teaching not only water baptism in 
general, but immersion in particular. I refer to Ro¬ 
mans 6 : 4-12. “We are buried with him by baptism,” 
etc. Those who quote this passage do so with an air 
as if to say, “This passage is surely conclusive as 
establishing immersion as the only correct baptism. 
But as with many other passages which have been 
relied upon as establishing this fact, it will be found 
that the passage will prove insufficient for this purpose ; 
for it will be clearly shown not only that immersion is 
not taught in this scripture, but that there is not even 
a drop of water about the whole passage, nor is water 
in any way referred to therein. That it will be found 
as wholly inadequate as are all the others in serving 
to establish water baptism will be fully admitted, ex¬ 
cept by those whose prejudices will not allow them to 
see the truth. Indeed, Paul in this very argument, 


296 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


after citing the text quoted, most emphatically declares 
that “we are not under the law, but under grace” 
(Rom. 6 : 15). 

Now it has been clearly shown that water baptism 
held a prominent place as one of the carnal ordi¬ 
nances, under the old law, because Paul, this same 
apostle, declares that the old law was largely a law of 
“divers washings [baptisms]” (Heb. 9 : 10). And if 
Paul is received as authority, his statements show 
clearly that we are not under the law of baptism by 
water but under the law of baptism of grace through 
Christ Jesus. What utter folly is it therefore to 
suppose that the baptism here talked about is the same 
old legal water baptism, when it is the baptism into 
Christ, namely, of grace, that is the specific subject 
calling forth the utterance of the text in dispute, while 
at the same time the old law is most emphatically 
repudiated, as we have seen in Romans 6 : 15. What 
an effectual spiritual eye-closer water becomes to some 
people. 

The fact is, that immersion, or burial in water, can 
by no legitimate process of reason or logic be even 
representative of “ baptism into Christ,” which is most 
clearly set forth as the real and true baptism. If the 
water into which the subject is buried is representative 
of burial into Christ, then the candidate should ever 
remain in the water, just as the Christian is set forth 
as abiding in Christ always ; for if plunging into the 
water is representative of being buried in Christ, then 
of necessity resurrection out of the water must be held, 
according to the same line of argument and logic, as be¬ 
ing representative of recall or resurrection out of Christ, 


BURIED BY BAPTISM 


297 


the very things which could by no possibility be held 
as either true or desirable; for to be raised or drawn 
back out of Christ would be equivalent to the “second 
death,” from which there is no resurrection, and would 
be a complete fulfillment of the scripture, “ If any man 
draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.” 
So it must be clearly evident to all that immersion in 
water cannot truthfully set forth, even in figure, that 
baptism into Christ which in Scripture, and especially 
in the commission, is set forth as the necessary thing. 
“ For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ 
have put on Christ,” and must not put him off again, 
as rising out of the water would indicate, if it indicates 
anything. And yet, alas, this is too often the truth set 
forth in the ordinance, whether by immersion or other¬ 
wise. There are those who seem to take {he matter in 
its literal sense, and hence their abiding in Christ is 
but little longer in duration than their stay in the 
water ; coming up “ straightway out of the water,” they 
go their own old way and are again “filled with their 
own devices.” 

The promise of Christ, “Ye shall indeed drink of 
the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I 
am baptized withal shall ye be baptized,” must have its 
complete fulfillment, and this entire passage to which 
our attention is now called is but a further statement 
of the how, where, and wdien of its fulfillment. 

The words, “We are buried with him by baptism,” 
not only have their fulfillment in this day and age of 
the world, but must have been just as true when uttered 
as they are to-day or ever will be. It will be seen that 
the statement is not that we shall be buried with him, 


298 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


but that we are or have been buried with him. The 
statement was therefore just as true, and as much of a 
fact, in the then present experience of those to whom 
the words were first addressed as they could possibly 
be to others. We will now consider this most wonder¬ 
ful statement, “We are buried with him by baptism.” 

IMPERFECT TRANSLATIONS. 

It might just as well be stated right here that this 
is not a proper translation of this passage from the 
Greek. We have before had occasion to refer to the 
fact that Greek words, like those of any other language, 
are susceptible of a variety of meanings. We have 
seen that efc, im, and /5 a-~(Zw are among the words 
that may be thus differently rendered. I now wish to 
call attention to another Greek word, used in the text 
under consideration. The word to which I refer is the 
preposition by. “Buried with him by baptism,” is 
the wording of the text. The word “by” is not the 
proper word, and should not have been used. Why ? 
I will explain. 

The word “by” is given in the text as the translation 
of the Greek word did. Now t , by is frequently a proper 
rendering of this word, and if the conception of the 
persons who gave us this translation had been the true 
and proper conception, then and in that case by would 
have been the proper w T ord to use with which to trans¬ 
late did. Notwithstanding the case in which this lan¬ 
guage is employed would seem to bear out the thought 
of the translators, and was no doubt an additional 
reason why they used by instead of for, with a view to, 
or any other preposition usually employed to translate 


BURIED BY BAPTISM 


299 


this word, it yet is so evident from the entire context 
that the condition into which man was brought through 
the sin in the garden is that which is referred to in the 
use of the term death, out of which it is the purpose of 
God to resurrect man through the redemptive work of 
Christ, which is wrought out for man while yet in this 
condition of death, that it is impossible not to see not 
only that the statement refers to the object of our 
burial into this condition of death in which we find 
ourselves, but also that the only hope of resurrection 
therefrom is predicated upon the fact that we are 
buried, while here, with or in Christ, who, being the 
“resurrection and the life,” is here with us, that we 
should in him be thoroughly baptized, and that 
through this purging the work of the devil in us 
might be thoroughly destroyed; for that “ he was 
manifested [or buried with us here] to take away our 
sins,” and thus resurrect us out of death, is the burden 
of all Scripture. 

But the translators, believing that water baptism 
was a necessary factor in human salvation (and, in¬ 
deed, no man could have lived in the church at that 
day who would deny this proposition), and hence the 
instrumentality through which eternal life was to be 
secured, had no choice but to translate this passage in 
harmony with their own understanding of the thing 
sought to be taught therein. Hence by was, to them, 
the only possible rendering of the Greek preposition 
Scd. But if we will look into any Greek lexicon, we 
shall discover that, while by is a frequent and proper 
translation of this word, yet there are other words 
which as truly and fully represent it, namely, to, 


300 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


through, by the agency of, for the sake of, on the 
account of, with, because of, during, in the course of, for, 
with a view to, for the purpose of, etc. 

I will cite but one passage illustrative of how by the 
use of the word by the sense would be so thoroughly 
changed that the passage would be made to express a 
lie. The passage referred to is this: “ The Sabbath 
was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath” 
(Mark 2:27). Here the word did is translated “for,” 
and the passage is made to express a great truth. But 
suppose the translators had thought the Sabbath to be 
an institution of human origin, and that God had 
nothing to do with its inauguration as a day to be 
observed. They would have been obliged to ren¬ 
der did in this passage into English in this way: 
The Sabbath was made by man, and not man by the 
Sabbath. 

Is it not manifest that this would of necessity have 
been the wording used by them, because it thus ex¬ 
presses the idea which is theirs in the supposition ? 
Yet I declare, without fear of the statement being 
successfully refuted, that this rendering which I have 
used as a hypothesis would not be any more perversive 
of the truth than is the rendering in the passage under 
consideration. The word did is the same in both in¬ 
stances. The one passage reads, “We are buried with 
him did baptism ” ; the other passage to which attention 
is called reads thus : “ The Sabbath was made did man, 
and not man did the Sabbath.” Yet the translators 
have rendered this same word did in the one place “ by,” 
and in the other, “for.” The question is, Why did they 
do it ? The answer is simple. They translated both 


BURIED BY BAPTISM 


301 


passages in harmony with their own understanding of 
that which was taught. In the one case their concep¬ 
tion was the right one, and hence the rendering is 
made to speak the truth ; in the other case their con¬ 
ception of the truth taught was wrong, and hence the 
rendering into English could not but be wrong. It 
w r ould have been impossible for them as honest men, 
with their understanding of that which was taught, to 
have translated it otherwise than they did. Truth, 
according to their conception of it, compelled them to 
use the preposition by, rather than for, because for 
could by no possibility be made to express the truth 
which they thought was taught in the passage. Their 
conception was, that baptism was an outward ordinance 
through or by the performance of which certain bene¬ 
ficial results were to be secured ; they never thought 
of baptism as being a thing in itself,—the result, and 
not the cause,—and hence they could not have ren¬ 
dered it otherwise. 

We have dwelt on this matter at length, because of 
its great importance, not only to the argument, but to 
the cause of truth itself. With this explanation, let us 
once again turn to the text, “Buried with him by [for, 
or with a view to] baptism.” It is for baptism, then, 
instead of by baptism, that “we are buried with him”? 
Certainly. And what is baptism? We have seen 
that all authority admits it to have the meaning of 
cleansing, purity. Well, then, the statement is sub¬ 
stantially this: Therefore we are buried with him for 
cleansing or purification. But is this needed, and is it 
true? Yea, verily. Nearly every page of the Book 
sets forth human depravity and man’s natural un- 


302 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


cleanness. It is declared, “Follow . . . holiness, with¬ 
out which no man shall see the Lord”; “Blessed are 
the pure in heart: for they [alone] shall see God.” 
Our whole system of theology is built on the proposi¬ 
tion that man is sinful, polluted, unclean, and stands 
in need of complete moral renovation. Take this out 
of the gospel, and we have no gospel. We will then 
consider it admitted that man stands in need of bap¬ 
tism, or cleansing. 

Where and when is this great work to be accom¬ 
plished? Certainly not in the future. We are not 
Catholics, that we should believe in a future purgatory, 
where expiation and purgation take place. Where, 
then, I repeat, is this purification to take place? But 
do I need to make such an inquiry ? No ; for we all 
know that it must transpire here in this life, if at all. 
The text says this is to transpire in a condition or state 
termed death. “We are buried with him by [for] bap¬ 
tism into death,” or, as it would be better understood, 
We are buried in death with him for our cleansing, or 
purification. Are we being purified ? Certainly. “ He 
shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold 
and silver.” If, then, we are being cleansed, purified, 
and baptized, we must be where these things are said 
to be accomplished. But these things are said to be 
accomplished in a condition called death. Are we in 
death, and is this condition in which we find man ever 
called death? Are we ever said to be dead notwith¬ 
standing we are in physical life? To ask the question 
is but to answer it. That we are in death is a fact 
universally recognized. If, then, one should raise the 
question, For what purpose are we here? not only this 


BURIED BY BAPTISM 


303 


passage, but ‘all Scripture, yea, and all human experi¬ 
ence as well, would quickly respond, For cleansing, 
purification, baptism. 

The Psalmist is heard to say, “Though I walk [or 
am walking] through the valley of the shadow of 
death, I will fear no evil.” Why? “For thou art ? 
with me; thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me.” 
Again, it is said, “ In the midst of life we are in death” ; 
and yet again, “To them which sat in the region and 
shadow of death light is sprung*up.” The Christian 
is everywhere promised resurrection out of this state 
of death. This very passage under consideration 
speaks of Christ being “raised up from the dead by 
the glory of the Father,” and holds out the promise 
that we also shall arise to walk in newness of life. 

BURIED, NOT IN “WATER,” BUT IN “DEATH.” 

We have already seen that baptism is a thing per¬ 
formed in, for, or upon man; that this is performed 
for him in this life, through the preaching of the 
gospel of Jesus Christ, and by the operation of the 
Divine Spirit, in connection with the present environ¬ 
ment of man, which is called death, out of which it is 
the destiny of all who will to be resurrected. All of 
this is under the immediate control of the Son of God, 
who says, “ I am with you alway.” The only thing 
now necessary is to show that being dead, or in a 
state of the dead, we are also buried, or that we are 
represented as being so in Scripture. 

This is easily settled by the utterance of the Master 
himself, “Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, 
in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his. 


304 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


voice, and shall come forth,” etc. We here find that 
not only are we dead, but that which is the natural 
condition with reference to the dead is also true of 
mankind, namely, he is buried, and in his grave (this 
is most fittingly illustrated by the condition of Lazarus). 

< But is Christ here with us ? Need I ask ? “ I will never 

leave thee, nor forsake thee.” “Lo, I am with you 
alway, even unto the end.” 

Is there anything left to be proved to make this pas¬ 
sage one of the most blessed passages in all the Book ? 
Let us read it again : “ Know ye not, that so many of 
us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into 
his death ? Therefore we are buried with him by [for] 
baptism into death ; that like as Christ was raised up 
from the [state of the] dead by the glory of the Father, 
oven so we also should walk in newness of life. For if 
we have been planted [or, buried] together in the like¬ 
ness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of 
his resurrection : knowing this, that our old man is 
crucified with him, that the body of sin might be de¬ 
stroyed.” 

We find it, then, to be a truth that we are buried in 
death, and that it is not true that we are buried in water. 
Also the burial spoken of in the passage cannot be in 
w T ater because the statement is, “ We are buried.” What 
a fearful stretch of the imagination it takes, and how 
must the word be warped, to make this burial spoken 
of to be in water, when it is most positively stated that 
it is in death that we are buried. We declare that 
there is not in this passage the slightest allusion to 
water in any form whatever, and challege any man to 
show the contrary. 


BURIED BY BAPTISM 


305 


This truth may be further shown to declare the 
burial spoken of not to be in water not simply because 
there is no water mentioned, • but because, also, the 
human race cannot truthfully be said to be buried in 
water, nor was Christ ever, so far as we know, buried 
in water: and it certainly will not be claimed that he 
is now thus buried. The text declares that “we are 
buried with him,” and if he is not thus buried now in 
water, certainly we cannot be, inasmuch as it is stated 
that we are buried with him—not that we must be, or 
shall be. Neither Christ nor mankind is buried in 
water; or, 'if they are, they are not aware of the fact, 
at least in so far as earthly water is referred to. We 
are fully aware that we are buried here in this condi¬ 
tion, which is everywhere in Scripture called death— 
“planted,” indeed, as this passage declares, “in the 
likeness [or, after the manner] of his death,” here in 
this life. “Forasmuch then as the children are par¬ 
takers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took 
part of the same,” etc. The thought is, that the Chris¬ 
tian is in Christ, and has an existence only by virtue 
of being in him. In respect to Christ being planted 
or buried here, and we being also planted or buried in 
him, the promise is that “we . . . shall grow up into 
him in all things,” for he is the life and inspiration of 
all our growth and development. “ He that hath the 
Son hath life.” “ In him we live, and move, and have 
our being.” 

It is declared in Scripture of the Christ, “ Though he 
were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things 
which he suffered.” And this also: “ For it became 
him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all 
20 


306 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the 
Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.” 
Where was all this accomplished? Here in this life? 
Certainly. 

Is it likely that anything of this was in the mind of 
the Master when he said to his disciples, “Ye shall in¬ 
deed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the 
baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be bap¬ 
tized”? Certainly. In other words, each individual 
Christian is passing through this death, in order that 
purification may be wrought out for him as he also 
passes with Christ through this life’s experience— 
anointed with the same Holy Ghost; passing through 
the same mode of existence; subject to the same con¬ 
ditions of suffering, sorrow, and disappointment, and 
finally of death itself, for this identical purpose, 
namely, baptism ; for it must be remembered always, 
as say the Scriptures, that “we are members of his 
body, of his flesh, and of his bones,” and although the 
Christ was and is perfect, and needs no purifying or 
cleansing, his body needs cleansing, which body we 
are. It is just this which is being cleansed and made 
pure in this death through which we are now passing. 
“Sanctify them through thy truth.” “I am . . . the 
truth.” Burial with him in death is not, then, pur¬ 
poseless ; on the contrary, it is alone in this life, which 
is called death, that all of this, the mighty purpose of 
God, is being worked out in and through Jesus Christ. 
“For this is the will of God, even your sanctification.” 
“Work out your own salvation with fear and trem¬ 
bling : for it is God which worketh in you both to 
will and to do of his good pleasure.” That death, 


BURIED BY BAPTISM 


807 


therefore, is as much for man as is aught else, is clearly 
evident. Indeed, the Scriptures declare that even as 
Christ, or the world, or life is ours, so also is death 
itself—“all are yours ; and ye are Christ’s ; and Christ 
is God’s.” 

We find, therefore, that the conception of the men 
who translated this passage from the Greek into the 
English for us was entirely wrong, their conception 
being that baptism was but an ordinance in the church, 
of which man in the outward was the subject, and 
water the only element. Therefore we ought to be no 
longer bound by their opinions, inasmuch as a w T rong 
conception must of necessity be expressed in wrong 
terms. We think enough has been said to show that 
the import of the text under consideration is not of 
the character attributed to it, and sought to be proved 
from it by those who, being short of legitimate evi¬ 
dence wherewith to bolster up an outward ordinance, 
seek to make this high and holy truth a means^of 
accomplishing this purpose. There is far too much in 
this passage to have its precious truth thus emasculated 
or buried. No, we are buried here, if you please, in 
this *present condition, which is acknowledged to be 
death, as we have seen, for a specific purpose, namely, 
baptism—buried, not in water, as some would like to 
have it, but in death, and that, too, because here, and 
here alone, such forces prevail as can at all accomplish 
the necessary result. 

That it is possible that we may not be able to under¬ 
stand just all that is involved in this word “death” may 
be readily admitted. In fact, it is quite evident that 
we do not. But this gives us no possible excuse for 


308 


CHKISTIAN BAPTISM 


interpreting it to mean water; for, while it is a truth 
that death often occurs in water, and while it may 
still further be admitted that burials are sometimes 
made in water, such as at sea, this is not the only agent 
of death, neither is it the only element in which men" 
are buried, neither has it ever been held that death 
and water are synonymous. Why they should be 
thought to be the same in this particular case, when in 
no other case in all the multiplied instances in which 
both of these words are used is it ever thought of as 
possible that they should be one and the same thing, 
is, to say the least, exceedingly strange, and is suggest¬ 
ive of a “dire necessity” upon the part of those who 
have thus thought themselves called upon to interpret 
this passage of Scripture. What that “ dire necessity ” 
was, and is, I will leave the reader to judge. 

Of one thing I am confident, and that is, that if the 
word “buried” had occurred in connection with any 
other word than “baptism,” there would not be one of 
all the number who would even suspect that water was 
at all referred to. Indeed, how they can even be per¬ 
suaded that in this passage water is referred to, when 
that into which the subject is said to be buried is death, 
is, as I have already said, beyond comprehension. The 
rendering of the passage as I have given it, although 
it does forever preclude the water theory, is yet so in 
harmony with every expressed thought of the Scriptures 
elsewhere given as to make its import self-evident. 
So simple and plain is the truth presented in this pas¬ 
sage, as I have rendered it, that few persons will be 
found who will not at once accept its harmony with 
other scriptural representations. 


BURIED BY BAPTISM 


309 


David, as we have seen, derived hope, joy, comfort, 
yea, gladness, from the thought that he was walking 
with Christ “through the valley of the shadow of 
death,” and he expressed himself as not being fearful, 
because the Lord was with him. Was David buried in 
water ? No ; but he was buried in “the valley of the 
shadow of death,” yea, the “sorrows of death” com¬ 
passed him about. Deliverance out of death was one 
of the favorite themes of the Psalmist. The fact is, the 
Lord was with the Psalmist as he walked here in this 
life, which, as I have said, is death. Another is heard 
to say, “ Out of the belly of hell cried I.” It was also 
here that “Enoch walked with God.” The Psalmist 
was as surely here for baptism as are we. He, as do 
we, cried out for cleansing.. “Create in me a clean 
heart, 0 God ; and renew a right spirit within me,” was 
his prayer. “Wash [baptize] me, and I shall be whiter 
than snow.” Again we hear him rejoicing, “for thou 
hast delivered my soul from death.” 

What a grand truth is thus made to stand forth in 
this passage. Who would destroy it ? And yet it is 
most effectually destroyed the moment we think of 
earthly water as the thing spoken of or referred to as 
being that into which we are said to be buried. We, 
like David, should recognize that we at present, in the 
righteous plan and purpose of our God, are walking 
through this valley and gloom of death, and that 
Christ the Lord, the great “Shepherd and Bishop” of 
our souls, is yet with us, buried with us in death, being 
assured that we are necessarily here buried for a time 
and for a purpose, and being assured not only by this, 
but by other passages of Scripture, that though we are 


310 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


here for a short time, if need be, in suffering and in 
death, and although these things are not “joyous, 
but grievous,” yet afterwards they shall yield “the 
peaceable fruits of righteousness unto them which are 
exercised thereby.” For while we are here, as was and 
is our Lord, in the enemy’s country, as it were, and 
while the devil is said to be “ the god of this world ” of 
death in which we are at present, yet it is true that the 
Christ is here with us to “destroy the works of the 
devil ” and to “ deliver them who through fear of death 
were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (in death). 
So that in the midst of the struggle we hear the cheer¬ 
ing words of the blessed Lord, who “ever liveth,” say¬ 
ing : “ Fear thou not; for I am with thee : be not 
dismayed ; for I am thy God : I will strengthen thee ; 
yea, I will help thee; yea, I will uphold thee with the 
right hand of my righteousness.” “Be of good cheer; 
I have overcome the world.” “Because I live, ye shall 
live also.” “Who shall separate us from the love of 
Christ? ... For I am persuaded, that neither death, 
nor life,” etc. AVill not death be able to separate us 
from the love of God ? No, it has not been, neither 
will it be, able to ; for “ I am with thee, and will keep 
thee.” While it is true that you are buried here in 
death for a time, it is also true that I am buried 
with you, says the Christ. 

“I’ll stand by until the morning, 

I ’ve come to save you, do not fear.” 

Though the night be long, and the fighting and 
wrestling severe, “humble yourselves in the sight 
of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.” Yea, your 
complete and full baptisnTshall be accomplished, for it 


BURIED BY BAPTISM 


311 


is his purpose as expressed in the very first utterance 
which he ever made to or about man : “Let us make 
man in our image” ; and it is his purpose to one day 
present you spotless, thoroughly purified, before his 
throne with exceeding joy. 

These are but some of the glorious truths which lie 
buried in this passage, yet not buried so deeply but 
that all who care to may read even as they run the 
race set before them in the gospel, and “the wayfaring 
men, though fools, shall not err therein.” 


CHAPTER XVIII 
PAUL’S MODE OF BAPTISM 

In I. Corinthians 1: 13-17 Paul makes this remark : 
“Were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank 
God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and 
Gaius. . . . And I baptized also the household of 
Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized 
any other. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to 
preach the gospel.” These remarks of Paul have 
always been thought to refer to water baptism ; but 
why, is beyond conception. He who would undertake 
to prove such a thing would find himself sorely pressed 
to find the evidence upon which to base such a propo¬ 
sition. There is no evidence to show that Paul had 
water baptism in mind when making these remarks. 
Paul could not consistently have baptized any one 
with water any more than could Peter, or ahy other 
of the apostles, after having been present at that first 
Christian council held at Jerusalem, mention of which 
has already been made. Having there lent his voice 
and influence to the overthrow of this ordinance 
(for he himself said, “For if I build again the things 
which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor”), he 
could never, therefore, have performed water baptism 
under any circumstances; and there is no hint any¬ 
where given that he ever did. 

We are told that he baptized twelve men at Ephesus 

312 


Paul’s mode of baptism 


313 


with the Holy Ghost (Acts 19 : 6), and there is no good 
reason for supposing that these Corinthian brethren 
were baptized differently from those at Ephesus. That 
Paul laid his hands upon some and called down the 
Holy Spirit upon them, thus baptizing them, is true, 
but it is evident from this scripture that this was by 
no means a common or necessary rite or practice with 
him. Indeed, he gives a good and sufficient reason 
for not doing so—“Lest any should say that I had 
baptized in mine own name.” This was the thing to 
be guarded against. The commission was particular 
in its command that they should baptize not in their 
own name, but in that of the Godhead. 

We know how disposed these Gentiles were to mag¬ 
nify the instrument as God. Paul had several expe¬ 
riences of this character, and so had Barnabas. It is 
related that at one time they had great difficulty in 
restraining the people from doing them worship. 
Garlands and sacrifices were brought for that purpose, 
the people thinking and saying, “The gods are come 
down to us.” There was, therefore, the greatest danger 
that- these heathen converts would bestow the honor 
and the glory belonging only unto God upon the 
instrument through whom God was pleased to work ; 
indeed, this was the effect produced upon their minds 
by the laying on of the hands of the apostles. 

Simon the sorcerer was unduly impressed by the 
“laying on of the hands” as practiced by Peter and 
John at Samaria. “Give me also this power,” said he. 
These same disciples had something of this same 
experience at the time of the healing of the lame man 
as they were going up to the temple to pray. That 


314 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


the people thought that Peter and John had wrought 
this healing by their own power, is evident from Peter’s 
remark. That such an act would have such a tendency 
is manifest. That this practice of “laying on of 
hands” was an assumption, and not embraced in the 
commission, is true. That this practice could not but 
serve to call attention to the operator is apparent. 
Hence the honor which belonged only unto God 
would, in the very nature of things, be given to the 
agent. 

Paul, not wishing to have his own personality thrust 
forward to the disparagement of the Master, had ceased 
this practice of laying on of hands, even as Peter and 
John no doubt did, inasmuch as nothing indicating its 
perpetuation as a practice is recorded. Paul, indeed, 
gives the reason why he abandoned the custom, namely, 
“Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own 
name.” No doubt Peter and John were influenced to 
give it up for the same reason. Paul declares that 
nothing of this kind was involved in the commission ; 
and it was not. Christ did not send any of them forth 
to determine wdio were and who were not fit subjects 
for the baptism of the Holy Ghost, but to “preach the 
gospel,” leaving the Holy Ghost to decide who were fit * 
persons to receive this gift of God. Paul, no doubt, 
had baptized Crispus and Gaius and the household of 
Stephanas in the same way that he had baptized the 
twelve men at Eph'esus, namely, by laying his hands 
upon them, and by thus specifically calling down the 
Holy Ghost. That the falling, or coming upon, or 
filling of the Holy Ghost is baptism, we have seen. 
The only part which was not authorized by the Master 


Paul’s mode of baptism 


315 


was the assumption of the power to determine who 
were to be the recipients thereof. Paul thanks God 
that he has gotten away from this practice, and else¬ 
where exhorts Timothy to like reserve, saying, “Lay 
hands suddenly on no man.” 

The Christian world may well be glad that Paul and 
the other apostles did break away from this old Jewish 
custom. What an awful thing it would have been to 
transmit this practice to the church. How popery 
would revel in this power. If they could but be allowed 
to determine upon whom the Holy Ghost might de¬ 
scend, and they thus become the custodians of the 
grace of God, how gladly indeed would the priests, like 
Simon the sorcerer, give money that on whomsoever 
they might lay hands, he should receive the Holy 
Ghost. But Paul thanks God that he ceased thus to 
arrogate to himself divine prerogatives, and the Chris¬ 
tian world may well say, Amen. No, Paul came to 
recognize that to preach the gospel was his part, and 
that to determine as to the conferment of the Holy 
Ghost was God’s part; and he was content, yea, thank¬ 
ful, that it was so. There is not the slightest evidence 
that water was the thing referred to at all. 

THE ONE TRUE BAPTISM. 

The next passage to which our attention is called is 
this : “ For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one 
body” (I. Cor. 12: 13). Here baptism is clearly set 
forth as the work of one Spirit, the same Holy Ghost of 
which we have been speaking. It will be remembered 
that the church of Jesus Christas declared in Scripture 
to be the body of Christ. We are in this scripture said 


316 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


to be set apart, cleansed, and made an integral part of 
Christ’s body, namely, his church spiritual, by baptism. 
Baptism into Christ is therefore the work of the Divine 
Spirit, judged by this passage also. 

Notwithstanding this specific and very plain declara¬ 
tion, there are yet those who persist in throwing a 
cloud upon this gracious work of the Divine Spirit by 
referring to earthly water as the agency by which men 
are to be baptized. But this passage is in harmony 
with every other declaration of Scripture when it 
refers the fact of baptism to the agency of the Holy 
Ghost and says not one word about earthly w r ater. 
That the church of Jesus Christ, which is in Scripture 
declared to be his body, is to be thoroughly purified, 
cleansed, sanctified, and made to be a “glorious church, 
not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing,” is the 
belief of all Christendom as well as the specific decla¬ 
ration of Scripture. Why, then, is it that when the 
Scriptures speak of baptism (which word, according to 
every authority, means just this thing), people are so 
slow to receive the truth and to rejoice in it ? Was 
ever blindness so inexcusable as here ? We pity the 
ignorance and blindness of the old Israelites, manifest 
in their not rising to the apprehension of the spiritual 
truth inhering in God’s gracious message to them and 
in their contenting themselves with the “husks,” while 
leaving the kernel of divine truth untouched ; but in 
what respect are those who persist in declaring that 
baptism is an outward ordinance of the church, to be 
administered in or by the use of water, better than 
they ? 

That every word or expression by which God seeks 


Paul’s mode of baptism 


317 


to show his purpose to man is equivalent to or synony¬ 
mous with baptism, cannot be truthfully denied. This 
passage before us, rightly interpreted, is in exact 
harmony with every other declaration of truth, and 
means simply what it states to be a fact, namely, that 
by the Spirit of God we are all purified or baptized 
into one body ; and since, as we have seen, the body of 
Christ is synonymous with the spiritual church of 
Christ, it is difficult to see in what way water can fulfill 
the conditions set forth as being necessary. The truth 
is that it does not, neither can it, no matter how it is 
administered. There is no saving efficacy in either 
the water or the mode of its application. Water, as I 
have shown, is not the thing talked about in Scripture 
when heart purification is under discussion, and of all 
the passages referred to not one is more explicit than 
the one just considered, namely, “For by one Spirit 
are we all baptized [ or, purified ] into one body.” 
How plain now, in the light of this passage, is the 
command of Christ to his disciples made to appear,— 
“baptizing them,” not into water, nor yet through the 
agency of water, but into the “ Godhead bodily,” 
namely, “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the Holy Ghost.” 

When we are given to understand that the first ex¬ 
pressed purpose of God with reference to man was, 
“ Let us make man in our image,” and when we read 
again the terms of Christ’s commission to his disciples, 
to baptize in the name of the triune God, we cannot 
resist the truth that being made into the image of 
God and being baptized into the name of the triune 
God are one and the same thing, and accomplished 


318 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


through identically the same instrumentality, namely, 
the Divine Spirit, and that earthly water has no more 
to do with this work than has any other earthly 
agency. We therefore assert with confidence that 
there is not the slightest reference in this passage to 
water—nay, water is not possible to this passage. This 
scripture is beyond the possibility of being wrested in 
any such way. He who would dare to assert that 
earthly water is the thing referred to here as the in¬ 
strumentality through which baptism is said to be 
accomplished, would first be compelled to show that 
the Spirit of God and earthly water are synonymous, 
than which no greater blasphemy could be possible, 
except that referred to in the olden time, in which 
some declared that Christ cast out devils through 
“Beelzebub the prince of the devils.” Even so the 
statement that water is the thing referred to in this 
passage must be blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, 
inasmuch as God says it is by the one Spirit that we 
are all baptized, whereas, on the contrary, it is de¬ 
clared by the church that water, and that earthly, is 
the thing or instrument in or through which baptism 
is wrought. If this is not blasphemy against the Holy 
Ghost, it is difficult to see how any one could blaspheme. 

NO BAPTISM, NO RESURRECTION. 

The next passage to which I will refer is found in I. 
Corinthians 15 : 29-32, and forms a part of Paul’s argu¬ 
ment on the resurrection. It reads thus : “ Else what 
shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the 
dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for 
the dead? and why stand we in jeopardy every hour? 


Paul’s mode of baptism 


319 


... If after the manner of men I have fought with 
beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me [or, what 
profit is it, namely, this fighting, to me], if the dead 
rise not? let us eat and drink ; for to-morrow we die.” 
We have here a very peculiar passage; and one from 
which it will be very difficult to extract the truth. The 
translators have done the best they could with it under 
the circumstances, hampered as they were by their pre¬ 
conceived opinion that water baptism is the thing being 
talked about. But there is not the slightest evidence 
that water baptism is the thing referred to. The re¬ 
mark is coupled with and refers to the dead. Who 
are the dead? The unbaptized, the impure, the un¬ 
holy, those who are said to be dead in the uncircum¬ 
cision of their flesh, “dead in trespasses and sins.” 
These are the dead referred to in this scripture. How 
are these to be saved ? Through the “ circumcision of 
Christ,” by being “ baptized into Christ,” by putting on 
Christ. How is all this to be accomplished? “Go ye 
into all the world, and preach the gospel to every crea¬ 
ture. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved 
[or, resurrected].” Christ was manifested amid this 
darkness, in this world of death, that he might take 
away our sins, or “ destroy the works of the devil.” 

But, Paul inquires, if there is to be no resurrection, 
why are we then baptized? What will be accom¬ 
plished ? for the Greek word means to do or to accom¬ 
plish. Why, then, was Christ sanctified and set apart 
to this work, if resurrection out of death was an 
impossible thing? And why were Paul and all the 
apostles baptized with the Holy Ghost in the interest 
of dead humanity, if nothing could be accomplished 


320 CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 

thereby? “If the dead rise not, then is Christ not 
raised”; “then is our preaching vain, and your faith 
is also vain”; “ye are yet in your sins.” If all of 
this is true, “let us eat and drink ; for to-morrow we 
die.” “If after the manner of men I have fought 
with beasts at Ephesus, what 4dvantageth it me [or 
any one else, for that matter], if the dead rise not?” 
If there was to be no difference between the final lot 
of the baptized and the unbaptized, Paul had not 
needed to sacrifice so much; yea, all that he had 
sacrificed and endured in order to preach the gospel 
of Jesus Christ had been in vain. And while bap¬ 
tism, cleansing, and purification of character had 
indeed been accomplished through the things which 
he had been called upon to suffer, why had he 
endured them in order that he with others might 
be baptized or purified, if this baptism was, after 
all, quite useless, seeing that the dead were not to 
rise, and all things were to remain eternally as they 
have been since the foundation of the world ? If this 
was so, then those who were impure, unbaptized, were 
in just as good a condition as were those who by the 
grace of God had waded through hardships and depri¬ 
vation in the vain thought that character thus obtained 
would be of any worth ; for “if in this life only we 
have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable,” 
and if our purification is not a ground upon which 
eternal life is predicated, then why are we baptized at 
all? 

That this is the argument, lies on the very surface. 
What does it all profit me ? says Paul. The “stripes,” 
the “imprisonment,” the maltreatment of every kind, 


VIEW OF NAZARETH. 






































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Paul’s mode of baptism 


321 


which he and others of the apostles suffered, and the 
“loss of all things” of which he speaks, were useless, 
utterly foolish, and the great moral cleansing result¬ 
ing from his fighting his own evil propensities and 
lustful appetites was to count for nothing, inasmuch as 
all remained in the state of death without a possi¬ 
bility of resurrection. But Paul brushes all this aside 
as idle vaporing, and we can almost hear his earnest 
words as he returns to the charge, thus : “ Awake 

[arise] to righteousness.” What is righteousness? 
Purity, sanctification. What is baptism ? Purity, 
sanctification. How attained ? In identically the 
same way, namely, by putting on Christ, which is 
declared to be the only baptism and the only resurrec¬ 
tion. There are, therefore, Paul would argue, purity, 
cleansing, righteousness, sanctification, and redemp¬ 
tion, and baptism into Christ secures us all of these. 
This answers the question, “ Why are they then baptized 
for the dead ? ” But in all of this there is no reference 
to earthly water. 


CHAPTER XIX 

PUTTING ON CHRIST 

% 

PUTTING ON CHEIST THE ONLY BAPTISM 

In Galatians 3 : 27 we find this reference to baptism : 
“ For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ 
have put on Christ.” This is part of Paul’s argument 
in which he cites faith in Jesus Christ for the justi¬ 
fication of the sinner, and the redemption wrought by 
faith in him, as over against the works of the law, as 
a ground for hope of eternal life. The very thing 
that the Jews were contending for was the observance 
of an outward ordinance, upon which they predicated 
their hope of salvation. The ordinance insisted upon 
so strenuously by these Jews was that of circumcision, 
as being of more worth than faith in Jesus Christ and 
the baptism of the Holy Ghost. 

That some of these Galatians had “fallen from 
grace” in resting their hope of salvation upon the 
observance of the outward rite of circumcision and 
the keeping of the law, to which they had been 
seduced by those of the circumcision who had as yet 
not arisen to the conception that Christ was “the end 
of the law for righteousness to every one that believ- 
eth,” is plain ; for Paul cries out: “ 0 foolish Galatians, 
'who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the 
truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evi¬ 
dently set forth, crucified among you ? This only 

322 


PUTTING ON CHRIST 


323 


would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the 
works of the law, or by the hearing of faith ? Are ye 
so foolish ? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now 
made perfect by the flesh ? . . . He therefore that 
ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles 
among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by 
the hearing of faith ? ” etc. It is strange indeed that 
any one in reading this passage should fail to catch 
its significance, so apparent is it. We have cited many 
passages in this discussion which prove beyond contro¬ 
versy the position we have taken ; but few, however, 
are stronger than this one in setting forth the foolish¬ 
ness of supposing that anything which can be done 
in the flesh, or outwardly, can at all be of the slightest 
significance in the matter of religion and Christianity. 

Paul was here endeavoring to show these weak 
brethren of Galatia how wondrously foolish was their 
adherence to an outward ordinance. They had heard 
the word of the gospel preached, they had believed 
that word, they had exercised faith in Christ, the Holy 
Ghost had been imparted to them, they stood com¬ 
plete in Jesus Christ, and yet, notwithstanding all 
this, at the instigation of some Jewish zealot, who had 
not as yet gotten out from under the shadow of the old 
ceremonial law, they allowed themselves, even as do 
some at the present day, to be persuaded that some¬ 
thing more was yet necessary to complete the work. 
Paul was endeavoring to call back these from follow¬ 
ing such vain delusions ; for while the error might not 
materially affect those among them who were really 
Christians, others not fully under the control of the 
Spirit might be led into the error of supposing that 


324 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


the ceremonial was all there was of the matter of the 
religion of Jesus Christ, even as it had long since been 
all there was of the religion of the Jews, and thus 
Christ’s work would be belittled. 

We do not need to be told of the strong tendency 
that seems to inhere in all religion to expend itself in 
mere outward form and ceremony, while the real and 
true grows less and less distinct. Human nature was 
the same then as now, and Paul wished to present the 
truth in the strongest possible light. The matter 
under discussion was, How is salvation to be obtained ? 
The Jew answered, By keeping th§ law. Paul inquired 
how they received the Spirit, whether “by the works of 
the law, or by the hearing of faith.” The test of this 
matter of how the Spirit was or is received was held 
by Paul as a good criterion as to all else of a spiritual 
character. If the Spirit were given as a reward for 
careful observance of the ceremonial law, which was 
being urged so persistently upon them by these Jews, 
then Paul no doubt would have recommended careful 
and continued observance thereof; but inasmuch as 
they had, as Gentiles, without even the knowledge 
of the law T , been “born again,” and had had their 
sins all washed away in the blood of Christ, and 
especially as they had received “the Holy Spirit of 
promise,” whereby they were “sealed unto the day of 
redemption,” and inasmuch as all this had been vouch¬ 
safed to them while they were as yet total strangers to 
all that the law stood for, how w T as it possible that any¬ 
thing more was necessary? Nothing of the kind is 
now at all necessary. Paul says: “ The law was our 
schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ”; “for ye are 


PUTTING ON CHRIST 


325 


all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For 
as many of you as have been baptized into Christ 
have put on Christ. . . And if ye be Christ’s, then 
are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the 
promise.” And again, “He that spared not his own 
Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not 
with him also freely give us all things?” The law 
can add nothing, Paul would say. 

Paul was here deprecating all outward forms and 
ceremonies, which were so strenuously advocated by 
those who had imbibed the idea that these were still 
necessary. To suppose that he would be so anxious for 
the overthrow of one feature of the ceremonial law that 
had been believed and enforced for centuries (namely, 
circumcision), and then that he would lend himself to 
the upbuilding of another part of the same old law, 
which could not even show the sanction of the Master, 
and which had been referred to by him only in order to 
repudiate it, is simply ridiculous. No, Paul here, as 
elsewhere, taught most emphatically that the human 
soul stood “complete in Him” without the intervention 
of any form or ceremony of any character whatever, 
and for himself wholly repudiated all form. Christ 
was to him “ sanctification, and redemption,” and we can 
also truthfully say, “Yea, all I need in him I find.” 
Hence the Spirit is represented in this, as well as in all 
other passages quoted, as the indispensable thing. 

“one lord, one faith, one baptism.” 

There is in Ephesians 4 : 5 another passage which those 
who pin their faith to water baptism (and especially 
our immersion friends) love to quote. Strange as it 


326 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


may seem, they do so in perfect ignorance of the fact 
that, whatever “crumbs of comfort” they may have 
been able to extract from any of the other passages 
herein quoted, there is absolutely nothing in this pas¬ 
sage for them. While it is true that in some instances 
water may have (at least in the sense of environment) 
had some connection with and performed a part in the 
ceremonial baptisms of the olden time, and in the pre¬ 
figuring of that purity which was to be wrought out in 
Jesus Christ, in this passage there is nothing even of 
this mild character, nor is it even for a moment allowed 
to appear. Water is certainly not intended in this 
passage in any form, wherever else it may be found. 
Indeed, here it finds its everlasting and inglorious 
death. 

That there is but “one Lord” is the universally 
accepted belief of all who claim the name of Chris¬ 
tian. We are all, also, ready to endorse the second 
statement, “one faith.” But if, indeed, there is “one 
baptism,” then water as a baptism must forever step 
down and out. If there is but one, this must of ne¬ 
cessity be Christ’s; and he everywhere sets forth the 
cleansing by the Holy Spirit, and the purifying of the 
heart by faith, and the putting on of Christ, as his 
baptism. There is certainly no Christian who will 
deny that there is the baptism of the Holy Ghost. 
Since there is, then there can by no possibility be 
another, inasmuch as the passage under consideration 
declares that there is only one ; and if there is but 
one, and that one is the baptism of the Holy Ghost, it 
is exceedingly difficult to see how or where water comes 
in. Indeed, it does not. It has no more to do with 


PUTTING ON CHRIST 


327 


constituting a person a Christian than has fleshly cir¬ 
cumcision. Indeed, of the two the latter has by far 
the greater force, and can show better reasons and 
arguments drawn from Scripture as to why it should 
be recognized as an ordinance binding upon the church 
to-day than can the former. 

That there is but one Lord is the faith of Christen¬ 
dom ; that there is but one faith readily commands 
the assent of all; that there is also but one baptism is 
equally true, no matter if the conception, of sortie is 
that there are many. One holds that baptism means 
to sprinkle ; another, that it means to pour ; while still 
another asserts that nothing but immersion can by any 
means be acknowledged as being true and genuine 
baptism. Yet another asserts, with all the assur¬ 
ance born of misconception, that to immerse three 
times backward is the only true and God-ordained 
mode ; and still another is found insisting, with all 
the power of ignorance, that three times forward is the 
only sure way to fulfill that which inheres in the com¬ 
mand to be baptized. We begin to wonder if we have 
gotten through with this nonsense, and are surprised 
to learn that there must be a certain quality of water, 
namely, running water. We are not yet through, for 
some assert that to “wash one another’s feet” is now 
the great command of the law. We most emphatically 
declare, however, that none of these things, nor all of 
them combined, have the slightest thing to do in the 
matter of the salvation of the human soul, and with 
equal assurance declare that not.one of them is that to. 
which the Word of God refers when the term baptize 
is employed to set forth what is commanded. On the 


328 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


contrary, that which is everywhere represented in 
Scripture as necessary is holiness, purity, sanctifica¬ 
tion, “the washing of regeneration, and renewing of 
the Holy Ghost.” It is as true to-day as when it was 
spoken, that “by the deeds of the law there shall no 
flesh be justified” ; and although we of to-day would 
wash ourselves “with niter” as one of old, the process 
would be a useless experiment, inasmuch as we can be 
cleansed only by the Spirit of God, by the blood of 
Jesus, by the water of life, all three of which are but 
one. The Spirit and the water and the blood agree, or 
unite, in one, namely, Christ. When the Master says, 
“He shall give you another Comforter, . . . even the 
Spirit of truth,” “whom I will send unto you from the 
Father,” “that he may abide with you forever,” etc., 
and “ I am with you alway, even unto the end of the 
world,” he refers to the same thing. 

When it is inquired by one, “Lord, how is it that 
thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the 
world?” the answer is, “If a man love me, he will 
keep my words : and my Father will love him, and we 
will come unto him [really, into him], and make [or, 
take up ] our abode with him.” Thus the soul has the 
Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost,—“the spirit, and 
the water, and the blood,”—the great three in one and 
one in three, the fullness of the Godhead. Is this 
sufficient, or do we yet need a little water of earth 
applied in some form to our person, to which we may 
look as a thing of more importance in itself than all 
the purifying and sanctifying grace of God ? May we 
not here with Paul cry out in view of such a concep¬ 
tion, “0 foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you?” 


PUTTING ON CHRIST 329 

We therefore emphasize and reiterate the words of 
the text, “ One Lord, one faith, one baptism.” 

As Christ and his disciples everywhere insisted that 
his baptism is that of the Holy Ghost, we believe that 
not only is water a useless thing, but when set up as 
being that to which Christ and the apostles referred 
when they directed the attention of the people to bap¬ 
tism as a prerequisite to salvation, it becomes an un¬ 
holy rival in the minds of the people, and frequently 
takes full possession of their thought and atten¬ 
tion, to the utter exclusion of the thought of the 
absolute necessity of the purifying presence of the 
Divine Spirit. So true is this that there are whole 
so-called Christian communities who have lost sight of 
the Holy Spirit in their never-ending clamor about the 
absolute importance of water baptism administered in 
harmony with their peculiar ideas. Others have given 
so much thought to this matter that they not only 
neglect the one and only true baptism, but, driven by 
the force of their own logic, in conjunction with this 
text of Scripture, “one baptism,” in order to uphold 
their own water baptism as the one referred to by the 
apostles have been forced to deny any other, that of 
the Divine Spirit included ; and not only so, but fol¬ 
lowing along the line of this damnable heresy, they 
have even now come to the ultimate end, which is the 
denial of the work of the Holy Ghost upon the human 
heart. There is no such thing as the Holy Gho.st 
baptism, they say. Yea, further than this, some 
declare openly that Christ is not the Son of God, that 
he is inferior to God, while acknowledging his so-called 
divinity. 


330 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


That this is the legitimate fruitage of a doctrine 
which confounds the most high and holy things of the 
Spirit with the traditions of men, is not to be wondered 
at. The same result has often occurred before. It is 
simply another case of “ having a form of godliness, 
but denying the power thereof.” It is serving ‘‘the 
creature more than the Creator.” They are, when 
quoting this passage to uphold water baptism, putting 
themselves on record as denying the truth which 
inheres in the passage itself, doing “despite unto the 
Spirit of grace,” and fulfilling the Scripture by “deny¬ 
ing the Lord that bought them.” No, there is evidently 
no water in this passage, and those who so teach 
“wrest” this, as they do also other scriptures, “unto 
their own destruction,” and have “turned the truth of 
God into a lie.” 


CHAPTER XX 

THE BAPTIZED CHURCH 
“the washing of water by the word.” 

In Ephesians 5:25, 26 we find how the church is 
to be sanctified and baptized : “Christ also loved the 
church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify 
and cleanse it [how? by earthly water? No, but] 
with the washing of water by [of, or through] the 
word, that he might present it to himself a glorious 
church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing ; 
but that it should be holy and without blemish.” 
This is the sum of all that inheres in true baptism. 

How does Christ purpose to accomplish this mighty 
work? Through “the washing of water by the word.” 
But does “the washing of water by the word” accom¬ 
plish this work ? It certainly does. Listen. “Sanctify 
[baptize, wash] them through thy truth : thy word is 
truth.” This was the prayer of Christ as he was 
about to send his disciples forth to preach this same 
word of the gospel, and thus through its preaching to 
baptize the nations. “Neither pray I for these alone, 
but for them also which shall believe on me through 
their word.” That the disciples did go out according 
to his commandment and preach this gospel, this word, 
and thus wash and baptize the nations, is true. And 
if Christ has in heaven to-day a mighty church, a 
great company of those who have “washed their robes, 

331 


332 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


and made them white [pure, baptized] in the blood of 
the Lamb” (who is no other than the Word of God), it 
is because the gospel was preached by the disciples, 
and the nations became purified through its influence 
and not through water baptism. 

Does the gospel of Christ purify when accompanied 
by the Holy Ghost? Yes. And is there no other 
name, means, or agency of baptism? No. And did 
Christ, when he sent his disciples forth to baptize by 
preaching the gospel, mean the same thing as this 
“ washing of water by the word ” ? Certainly. Who 
can doubt or deny such a proposition ? It cannot be 
truthfully denied. This passage is therefore but an¬ 
other indestructible link in the great chain of evidence 
to prove that Christian baptism is the work of the 
Holy Spirit alone through the gospel. The ( water 
referred to is not earthly, as any person ought to know, 
but heavenly, spiritual, divine, “the washing of regen¬ 
eration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost,” and to 
teach otherwise is surely downright “fundamental 
error,” the “Augsburg” to the contrary notwith¬ 
standing. 

BAPTISM AND CIRCUMCISION IDENTICAL. 

The next passage in order is Colossians 2:12. We 
will quote the context, and as we do so a wondrous 
truth is disclosed, namely, that circumcision and bap¬ 
tism are one and the same. The subject is, as before, 
Christ the only ground of salvation. In Colossians 1 : 
27, 28 we find this remark : “To whom God would 
make known what is the riches of the glory of this 
mystery among the Gentiles; which is [now mark] 


THE BAPTIZED CHURCH 


333 


Christ in yon, the hope of glory : whom we preach, . . 
. . that we may present every man perfect in Christ 
Jesus.” Colossians 2:3 et seq.: “In whom are hid all 
the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. And this I 
say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing 
words. ... As ye have therefore received Christ 
Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him; rooted and built 
up [both foundation and superstructure] in him, and 
stablished in the faith. . . Beware lest any man spoil 
you [how?] through philosophy and vain deceit, after 
the tradition of men, after the rudiments [principles, 
or teachings] of the world, and not after Christ. For 
in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. 
And ye are complete in him, ... in whom also ye are 
circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, 
in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the 
circumcision of Christ: buried with him in baptism, 
wherein [or, through whom] also ye are risen [how? 
through water baptism? No, but] with him through 
the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him 
from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and 
the uncircumcision [or, impure or unbaptized condi¬ 
tion] of your flesh, hath he quickened together with 
him, having forgiven you all trespasses ; blotting out 
[or, having obliterated] the hand-writing of ordinances 
[namely, the old law] that was against us, which was 
contrary to us, and took it [not them, but it, showing 
that he referred to the entire law, which Paul says is 
contained “in meats and drinks, and divers washings 
[baptisms], and carnal ordinances”] out of the way, 
nailing it to his cross. . . . Let no man therefore 
judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an 


334 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


holyday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days: 
which are a shadow of things to come; but the body 
is of Christ. Let no man beguile you. . . . Where¬ 
fore, if ye be dead with [or, in] Christ from the rudi¬ 
ments of the world [the traditions of men], why, as 
though living in the world, are .ye subject to ordi¬ 
nances ? ” etc. 

We have quoted this entire passage because it ex¬ 
actly sets forth what we have everywhere sought to 
emphasize, namely, that being circumcised or baptized 
into Christ is the exclusive work of the Christ by 
the Holy Ghost through the gospel, and that human 
traditions, or man-ordained ordinances, as a ground of 
hope of eternal life were, as the apostle here declares, 
everlastingly done away in Christ. In effect Paul in¬ 
quires, If we are in Christ, why as though not in him 
are we subject, to these ordinances, since Christ blotted 
out these same ordinances in his death upon the cross? 
I have already shown that one of these ordinances 
was, as says Paul, “divers washings [baptisms] ” Was 
this not blotted out with all else inhering in the cere¬ 
monial law? Was this the only portion of the old 
law which was not fulfilled in Christ? and if it was 
not, how came it so? Will some one explain? It cer¬ 
tainly seems impossible that language could be used 
more fully setting forth the condition of the church 
to-day than that here used by the Apostle Paul in his 
efforts to set forth the truth of the gospel of Christ to 
the church at Colosse. 

Almost the same circumstances existed here as in 
the church at Galatia. There were those here also 
who taught the necessity of outward circumcision, as 


THE BAPTIZED CHURCH 


335 


well as outward baptism. Paul warns the brethren 
against this teaching, denominating it “philosophy and 
vain deceit,” after the principles of the world (the 
traditions of men), “and not after Christ,” assuring 
them that, inasmuch as they were in Christ, they were 
in him both circumcised and baptized—not outwardly 
and “in the flesh,” it is true, but in that “made with¬ 
out hands,” even the “circumcision of Christ,” in 
whom, he tells them, they stand “complete,” not 
through the operation of the knife of the priest, as 
in circumcision, or by means of being plunged into 
earthly water. All the circumcision, cleansing, puri¬ 
fying, baptizing, here spoken of is referred to God as 
the operator—“through the faith of the operation of 
God.” So here again, as everywhere else, our attention 
is called, not to water, but to the operation of God 
through the Holy Ghost as being that by which man¬ 
kind is to be raised out of the state of the dead. How 
exceedingly strange it is that any one reading this pas¬ 
sage should refer this whole matter to water as the 
thing talked about, when the whole argument is a 
direct attack upon the practice and teachings of those 
who sought to make these new Gentile converts believe 
that their salvation lay in their being circumcised and 
keeping the law of Moses. 

That there were then those who sought to persuade 
the people that water baptism was also necessary to 
salvation (as some are foolish enough to do to-day) is 
true, as we have seen. Hence'the apostle includes 
baptism with circumcision as being of a spiritual char¬ 
acter and referring to the operation, not of man, but 
of God. The fact that both circumcision and baptism 


336 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


are wrought in Christ is fully set forth, and needs no 
further comment or explanation. 

Paul elsewhere directly attacks, not the recipients of 
these Jewish doctrines and tendencies, which in his 
time and for two hundred years thereafter were persist¬ 
ently sought to be thrust upon the Christian church 
by these Judaizing teachers, but the Jew himself, 
both the teacher and his doctrine. The latter may 
very appropriately be introduced just here. The 
remark to which I refer is found in Romans 2 : 28, 
and sets forth the startling fact that 

THE FLESHLY JEW IS NO REAL JEW. 

“He is not a Jew which is one outwardly; neither is 
that circumcision which is outward in the flesh : but 
he is a Jew which is one inwardly; and cirbumcision 
is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; 
whose praise is not of men, but of God.” Not only is 
this statement of Paul directed against the ceremonial 
law as being a figure, a representation, but the fact is 
clearly stated that the Jew himself, with all his peculiar 
and distinctive characteristics, was not a reality, and 
hence of necessity must also be but a figure, a repre¬ 
sentation. He, too, in common with all else which 
went to make up or constitute the old typical, shadowy 
dispensation of which he was the central figure, was 
to step out and down and pass away, inasmuch as that 
which he foreshadowed was even now pressing forward 
for recognition, namely Christ and Christianity, which 
alone are the two representatives of God upon earth, 
and are the complete fulfillment of that which Jew 
and Judaism stood for; and, since their ushering in, 


THE BAPTIZED CHURCH 


337 


Jew and Judaism, as they existed in figure and in 
representation in the flesh, both as to the individual 
and as to the entire body, have forever stepped down 
and out, swallowed up in the mighty presence of that 
for which they stood, namely, visible, tangible sonship 
in God—Christianity. 

Are not these people, then, whom we familiarly call 
Jews such in reality? Certainly not. “He is not a 
Jew which is one outwardly.” He has passed. He was 
the central figure, as has been said, of all that inhered 
in the old dispensation, but as surely is dead and has 
forever passed away as all of the mighty system 
which clustered around him, and of which he was 
the center. The environed and the environment have 
alike vanished, each being but the representation of 
that wondrous reality which to-day has its center in 
the Son of God, who is the “head over all things 
to the church.” As we thus see all the types and 
shadows of the olden time one after another disappear 
by divine authority—meats, drinks, new moons, feast 
days, various ordinances, “touch not; taste not; han¬ 
dle not,” the “bloody sacrifice,” the “paschal lamb,” 
circumcision; when we finally read the utterance 
of the apostle, “He is not a Jew [even] which is one 
outwardly”; and when we see Judaism itself vanish¬ 
ing away, by what process of reason or logic, or by 
what authority, I again inquire, can the rite of water 
baptism be still perpetuated, notwithstanding the Jew 
himself, the very center of the old system, has forever 
disappeared as a factor in the divine economy ? 

Few, perhaps, have stopped to think that those Jews 
who accepted the religion of Jesus Christ were at once, 
22 


338 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


upon such acceptance, Jews no longer. At once they 
were “put out of the synagogue,” and became dead to 
all previous religious existence. Hence Paul truthfully 
says, “ For ye are dead.” Hence it is that the so-called 
Judaism of to-day is as void of Christianity as it was 
nineteen hundred years ago. The reason is the same 
to-day as it ever was, namely, that as soon as a Jew 
after the flesh embraces Christianity, he is not only cut 
off by his own people and fellow-religionists, but he 
is swallowed up and completely obliterated in his new 
environment. To realize this swallowing up process* 
and the consequent loss of all former religious identity, 
we have only to inquire for the posterity of the Jews 
who by hundreds of thousands embraced the religion 
of Jesus Christ. Where are they ? Echo answers, 
Where ? Swallowed up, lost in the great religious 
vortex of that Christian civilization of which it may 
be truthfully said that they were the very foundation. 

But this declaration of Paul, that even the Jew after 
the flesh was not the real Jew, must, if at all compre¬ 
hended, have almost paralyzed those old Jews, who. 
thought themselves to be within the Abrahamic cove¬ 
nant because they had submitted themselves to tho 
outward ordinance of circumcision, thinking in their 
blindness that this was that which God meant when 
circumcision was mentioned by him in the Book, 
whereas Paul ruthlessly brushes all this aside as being 
of no practical value, inasmuch as it was not the thing 
referred to by God at all, and was at best, even under 
the old dispensation, but a figure of the coming true, 
and thorough purification of Christ. 

They (the Jews) had stood before both John and 


THE BAPTIZED CHURCH 


339 


the Master, and had refused eternal life upon the 
ground of their connection with Abraham, and hence 
with God, solely upon the ground of fleshly circum¬ 
cision, notwithstanding John the Baptist had warned 
them against such a thought in these words : “ Think 
not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our 
father,” etc., and Christ had plainly told them that 
they were not, in the true sense, Abraham’s seed : “ I 
know that ye are Abraham’s seed [that is, according 
to the flesh] ; but ye seek to kill me. . . . This did 
not Abraham.” He also says of them, “Ye are of 
your father the devil.” 

All this ought to teach us the danger of accepting 
the shadow for the substance, and especially so now, 
when the day of shadow “is past, and the true light 
now shineth.” There was much more excuse for the 
blindness of the Jews than there is for us at the pres¬ 
ent day. They had not the light and instruction, both 
of precept and example, that we now enjoy. “Let us 
therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering 
into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of 
it ... , after the same example of unbelief.” 

Paul in this passage in Romans but affirms what 
John and Christ had both previously taught; only he 
makes the matter still more plain by stating that the 
circumcision of which the Bible speaks was not a thing 
that could at all have its fulfillment in the flesh, no 
matter even if they should, as some did, make of 
themselves eunuchs in the vain thought that salvation 
lay along that line, when, as we know (and as every one 
else ought to know), this had nothing whatever to do 
with the matter, because circumcision did not refer to 


340 CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 

a fleshly operation, but was, even as the apostle said, 
“that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter.” 
This must certainly have been a new and strange doc¬ 
trine to those Jews, who prided themselves upon their 
safety by virtue of their having had the rite of circum¬ 
cision performed upon them in the flesh. Let us profit 
by their error, and not be led, as were they, to believe 
that God’s holy law can be fulfilled in the outward 
performance of any ordinance. 

That there were some who had “made themselves 
eunuchs [through this extreme of self-mutilation in 
circumcision] for the kingdom of heaven’s sake,” the 
Master himself declares. Paul would say of these, “I 
would they were even cut off which trouble you.” 
This expression “cut off” refers to their everlasting dis¬ 
puting as to the extent of mutilation necessary in what 
might be termed true circumcision, the discussion going 
so far in some cases as to cause some weak-minded 
persons to make eunuchs of themselves, in the vain 
thought that the kingdom of heaven lay along that 
line. If there be, thought they, any doubt about the 
matter, it certainly can all' be fulfilled by this extreme 
of self-mutilation. Hence we find this remark in 
Scripture already referred to : “ Some . . . have made 
themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake,” 
referring directly to this practice of complete severance 
of the parts, in the vain thought that in this way they 
would be sure to be within the provisions of the cove¬ 
nant made by God with their father Abraham, and 
stand in no danger of failure because it might be held 
by some fanatical priest or Jewish zealot that the 
ordinance contemplated a greater and more extended 


THE BAPTIZED CHURCH 


341 


operation than had been performed upon them, and 
that hence their salvation would be imperiled (very 
much the same thought, you perceive, which moves 
many to-day to the extreme of water baptism). 

Thus in that time the vain endeavor was made by 
some (under a false conception of either the significance 
of the rite or the meaning of the term used to describe 
it) through self-mutilation to fulfill a law which most 
bitterly condemned the practice, and which most em¬ 
phatically stated that any person guilty in this regard, 
or wounded in this particular, should “not enter into 
the congregation of the Lord” (Deut. 23 : 1). They 
were not aware that the circumcision talked about and 
so emphatically insisted upon in God’s Word could not 
be fulfilled in the outward form any more than can 
baptism (Rom. 2 : 28, 29), as the Master himself de¬ 
clares. But how foolish and vain was all their effort! 
“ Who hath required this at your hand ? ” “ What 

doth the Lord thy God require of thee ?” Nothing of 
this kind, certainly. But he does require purity of 
heart and life,—nothing more, nothing less,—and this 
is wrought out for us by the Holy Spirit through the 
gospel, and is not the result of anything earthly. 

All most readily acknowledge that heart purity 
is the thing everywhere inculcated in God’s Word. 
Why, then, do we allow ourselves to suppose that 
aught else than this is required ? When God by the 
mighty energy of his Holy Spirit operates upon the 
human heart, and when Christ takes possession of 
the soul of man, nothing of a human or earthly char¬ 
acter is needed as a reinforcement of the divine energy. 
Whenever we thrust in any human scheme or ordi- 


342 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


nance upon which the mind is made to rely as having 
anything whatsoever to do with the matter of our 
salvation, we are detracting just so much from the 
honor which belongs only to God as the active instru¬ 
mentality, as well as the cause and ground, of our 
salvation; for it is yet true that “ by grace ye are 
saved ” ; and if by grace, then is the following of any 
human plan or device but adding to God’s Word, and 
hence of necessity a curse, even as the Scriptures 
declare. 

It is strange that any person, in the face of the plain 
warning of Scripture, and while reading the very 
passages which most thoroughly condemn the course 
of setting up purely human devices and attributing to 
them the sanction of God and divine helpfulness, 
should seek to make those same passages in which 
God utters his warning, and in which he makes most 
emphatic protest against such a low conception of his 
truth, do duty as furnishing authority upon which to 
build the very practices which are most thoroughly 
repudiated. 


CHAPTER XXI 

CHRIST THE END OF THE LAW 
SCRIPTURE REPRESENTATIONS. 

Paul elsewhere declares that the old law of works is 
dead, and that we are no longer under its provisions. 
(Rom. 7 and 8.) “For the law of the Spirit of life in 
Christ Jesus hath made me free,” etc. “As many as 
are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God,” 
but “they which are the children of the flesh, these 
are not the children of God.” “Christ is the end of 
the law for righteousness.” “By grace are ye saved 
through faith,” “ and if by grace, then is it no more of 
works.” “Therefore we conclude that a man is justi¬ 
fied by faith without the deeds of the law,” “knowing 
that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but 
by the faith of Jesus Christ. . . : for by the works of 
the law shall no flesh be justified.” “I . . . am dead to 
the law, that I might live unto God.” “Behold, I 
Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised [that is, 
after the manner of the law], Christ shall profit you 
nothing. . . . Christ is become of no effect unto you, 
whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are 
fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait 
for the hope of righteousness by faith.” And Paul 
elsewhere warns Timothy against those who would set 
up mere human devices and ordinances, speaking of 
them as “seducing spirits,” and as promulgating doc- 


344 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


trines not of God, but of the devil, and hence in 
opposition to the teachings of the gospel of Christ. (I. 
Tim. 4 : 1-3, etc.) 

What was it these “seducing spirits” (w T hich were 
simply individuals) were teaching that was assailed so 
furiously by Paul? Questions pertaining exclusively 
to human ordinances as contained in the old law, 
which had been abrogated, as we have seen, but which 
many still sought to enforce. The old law prohibited 
the Jews from intermarriage with the Gentiles. This 
law was sought to be literally perpetuated, as was also 
the law respecting meats, drinks, new moons, Sabbath 
days, baptisms, etc. Paul directs that everything be 
sanctified and made clean (baptized) by the “word of 
God and prayer,” and not by any outward form or 
ceremony (I. Tim. 4:5), and in I. Timothy 5 : 22, 23 
he exhorts Timothy to keep himself pure, clean, bap¬ 
tized, not by taking earthly water, but by the wine of 
the grace of God, which is for the inward man, to 
strengthen him against his “often infirmities.” In Titus 
3 : 5 this same apostle tells us that “ not by works of 
righteousness which we have done, but according to 
his mercy he saved us [by being baptized or w T ashed 
with earthly water? No ; but], by the washing of re¬ 
generation, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; which 
he shed on us abundantly.” Again, in Philippians 
3 : 3, Paul emphasizes this same truth : “ For we are 

the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, . . . 
and have no confidence in the flesh [that is, in any 
fleshly ordinance].” With Paul Christianity, or being 
“baptized into Christ,” which he says can only be ful¬ 
filled by putting on Christ, was the only thing that 


CHRIST THE END OF THE LAW 345 

counted. All else was to him but as refuse, that he 
might win Christ, “by whom the world is crucified 
unto me, and I unto the world.” True circumcision, 
according to Paul, is synonymous with sonship in God. 
Baptism means nothing less, inasmuch as they are 
both the same. 

This is perhaps more fully set forth as once again 
Paul refers to it in Hebrews 8, in which the two cove¬ 
nants, testaments, or laws are contrasted. “But now 
hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, hy how 
much also he is the Mediator of a better covenant, 
which was established upon better promises. For if 
that first covenant had been faultless, then should no 
place have been sought for the second. For, finding 
fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith 
the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the 
house of Israel and with the house of Judah,” etc. 
Hebrews 9:1: “Then verily the first covenant had 
also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanc¬ 
tuary.” And has not the second covenant any of 
these ? No, not by divine appointment. Hebrews 
9 : 6 et seq.: “ Now when these things were thus or¬ 
dained, . . . the Holy Ghost this signifying, that the 
way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, 
while as [or, as long as] the first tabernacle was yet 
standing: which was [now mark] a figure for the 
time then present, in which were offered both gifts and 
sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service 
perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; which [now 
mark again] stood only in meats and drinks, and 
divers washings [^aTm^o??], and carnal [fleshly] 
ordinances, imposed on them [mark again] until the 


346 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


time of reformation [or, setting things right]. But 
Christ being come an High Priest of good things to 
come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not 
made with hands, that is to say, not of this building 
[or, creation] ; neither by the blood of goats and 
•calves, but by his own blood,” etc. Here we find that 
water baptism is classified with meats and 

drinks and other carnal ordinances which were imposed 
under the old law or covenant, and that these were 
•only intended to be imposed until the bringing in or 
setting up of the new or Christian dispensation ; and, 
as I have before said, and as is everywhere made 
manifest, these are no longer to be imposed. 

The only hope of perpetuating water baptism by 
divine authority under the new covenant or dispensa¬ 
tion would be to show that it had no part or place in 
the old Jewish ceremonial law, and that there it typi¬ 
fied nothing; for if water baptism had a representa¬ 
tive place among the types and shadows of the old 
•ceremonial law, then indeed the fulfillment of that 
which it represented would at once and forever cause 
the representation to cease by the universally operative 
“statute of limitation.” As no one of any intelligence 
whatever will deny that water baptism held a large 
place under the old ceremonial law, it seems inevitable 
that water baptism as a divinely authorized Christian 
ordinance must be given up, inasmuch as it has been 
shown that all the washings, purifications, and cleans¬ 
ings practiced under the old law are properly termed 
baptisms in Scripture, even as Paul here declares. A 
careful examination of this law, and of the additions 
thereto made by the Pharisees and elders, will reveal 


CHRIST THE END OF THE LAW 


347 


the fact that there were but few occupations in which 
the ordinary man or woman engaged which did not 
necessitate frequent ceremonial purifications, and it 
was therefore most properly styled a “yoke” by Peter. 

We can, however, appreciate the fact that Paul’s posi¬ 
tion and his utterances, especially the one which declared 
the Jew to be such no longer, must have called down 
upon his head the hot wrath of these Jews; for even 
to-day there is unbounded anger in the church against 
the man who dares to affirm that these old rites and 
ceremonies, including water baptism, have their com¬ 
plete fulfillment in Christ, and hence have no further 
significance and ought to be done away with. Indeed, 
we find human nature very much the same now as 
then, and fully as ready to crucify any one who points 
out this unholy idolatry, this terrible blasphemy. 


CHAPTER XXII 

THE INCORRUPTIBLE SEED 

There is in I. Peter 1 : 22, 23 a passage which is 
representative of many others, which, while teaching 
the same truth which we have set forth, yet refers 
thereto in different language. The word baptize is not 
the word used to express the truth taught, but inas¬ 
much as the word purify is used, a w T ord which is fre¬ 
quently employed to express the same thought as 
inheres in the term baptize , we will examine the pas¬ 
sage, using the terms interchangeably. 

Many other passages of like character might be 
found in the sacred record wherein the word baptize 
does not appear, yet which treat upon the same general 
subject, namely, the work of God upon the human 
soul; but since to examine all the passages in the 
book in which the terms purify , cleanse , wash , sanctify, 
purge , and words of like import occur would carry us 
far beyond the limits of an ordinary volume, I have 
confined myself to the passages in which the term 
baptize occurs as a basis for argument. However, 
there are scores of other passages in which the truth is 
taught through the medium of other words than bap¬ 
tize, which would as fully uphold my position as do the 
passages cited. 

The passage to which I refer, and which, I shall use 
as representative of many others which might be 

348 


THE INCORRUPTIBLE SEED 349 

quoted in which the word used to express the thought 
of the text is not baptize , but purify , reads thus : “ See- 
ing ye have purified [or, baptized] your souls in obey¬ 
ing the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love 
of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a 
pure heart fervently : being born again, not of cor¬ 
ruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, 
which liveth and abideth forever.” It would be diffi¬ 
cult to find a passage more expressive than this of the 
great truth for which I have been contending in this 
argument. 

In the treatment of this same subject under the 
general head of “The New Birth” some points were 
purposely left to fye considered in connection with the 
passage now before us. These points I will now intro¬ 
duce. 

THE INCORRUPTIBLE SEED AND THE NEW BIRTH 
IDENTICAL. 

That this new birth of which Peter speaks in this 
passage is the same as that which the Master urged 
upon Nicodemus, will not be denied by any one. This 
being true, it also follows that the agency or agencies 
by which this new birth is effected must be the same 
whether set forth by Peter or by the Master himself. 
In Christ’s remarks to Nicodemus the new birth was 
attributed to water and the Spirit as the efficient cause 
thereof. In this statement of Peter the new birth is 
attributed to obedience of the truth through the Spirit, 
or, as the latter part of the passage declares, “being 
born again [how? through earthly agencies or ordi¬ 
nances, such as water baptism, etc.? No], not of 


350 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of 
God, which liveth and abideth forever.” 

It will be easily seen that earthly water can have no 
part or place in this program, unless we are prepared 
to assert that earthly water is a spiritual force and 
hence “incorruptible.” The theologians of the old 
school, seeing this logical necessity, sought to harmo¬ 
nize their belief and practice with this utterance of 
Peter by simply arrogating to themselves the power 
and authority to convert the earthly and “corruptible” 
into the supernatural and “incorruptible” through 
priestly manipulation, so that earthly, “corruptible” 
water (as well as the bread and wine in communion) 
became through supernatural transformation, under 
priestly manipulation, supernatural and incorruptible. 
It was thus that the great doctrine known as “tran- 
substantiation ” was foisted upon the church and men 
were made to believe that the baptismal water, in the 
hands of a religious functionary, whether robed priest 
or Protestant minister, was removed out of the sphere 
of the earthly and became possessed of the sacred qual¬ 
ities of the divine, and hence that to be baptized there¬ 
with was equivalent to a pardon of sin, and a passport 
to eternal life. It is true that this w T as and is a most 
sacrilegious usurpation of divine powers and preroga¬ 
tives, and yet the position is much more consistent^ 
and not one whit more blasphemous, than is the belief 
and claim that the soul of man can be morally reno¬ 
vated by subscription to any outward rite, ceremony,, 
or ordinance. 

Peter, however, settles the whole matter by declar¬ 
ing that the soul of man is purified, or baptized, by 


THE INCORRUPTIBLE SEED 


351 


obedience to the truth through the Spirit, which is, 
again, nothing less than the “ word of God,” namely, 
Jesus Christ, “the water,” the incorruptible seed. The 
Master declares himself to be the truth. John, who 
recounts this conversation with Nicodemus, of which 
w T e have spoken, prefaces the statement with the decla¬ 
ration: “In the beginning was the Word, and the 
Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . He 
came unto his own, and his own received him not. 
But as many as received him, to them gave he power 
to become the sons of God, even to them that believe 
on his name : which were born, not of blood, nor of 
the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of 
God.” This samejoved disciple has much to say in 
his epistles also about this subject of the new birth. 
“Beloved, now are we the sons of God. . . . Whoso¬ 
ever is born of God doth not commit [practice is a 
better rendering] sin ; for his seed remaineth in him : 
and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. . . . 
And every one that loveth is born of God. . . . Who¬ 
soever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God. 
. . . Whatsoever is born of God overcometh the 
world. . . . He that hath the Son hath life. . . . 
Whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that 
is begotten [or, born] of God keepeth himself,” etc. 

We thus see that all Scripture corroborates the 
statement of Christ that the new birth is “ from above,” 
“incorruptible,” as Peter says, and John, in these 
numerous quotations, declares it to be of God. How 
silly, then, and foolish, yea, wicked, is the claim that 
any one speaking by the Holy Ghost could have 
coupled earthly water “birth” or “baptism,” as essen- 


352 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


tial, with such high and sacred things. Indeed, this 
same John whom we have quoted, in the same chapter 
in which he speaks of being born of God, declares that 
the spirit, the water, and the blood, of which man is 
to be born or baptized, unite and are fulfilled in one, 
namely, Christ Jesus. (I. John 5 . 8.) 

The thought in all of these passages regarding the 
new birth, whether expressed by Christ himself in his 
conversation with Nicodemus, or by Peter in this pas¬ 
sage under consideration, or by John in the numerous 
passages quoted from him, is that no eternal life, no 
immortal fruitage, can rightfully be expected from 
any earthly or corruptible seed, whether water baptism 
or any other earthly agency, element, or ordinance. 
The reason is obvious. Every earthly seed has its 
limitations. The universal law in the physical w r orld 
is death, and no seed of an earthly character has in 
itself sufficient potentiality to escape this law of uni¬ 
versal mutability or corruption. Only “the law of 
the Spirit, of life in Christ Jesus” can make us “free 
from the law of sin and death.” As w r ell might we 
expect to raise indestructible corn or wheat from 
earthly seed as that spiritual life could be produced or 
perpetuated through outward religious forms and 
ceremonies. 

Paul declares that even under the old dispensation 
these by no means could take away sin or “make him 
that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the con- 
cience” ; and yet perfection is that which is demanded 
of all who hope “to obtain that world, and the resur¬ 
rection from the dead.” “Without holiness no man 
shall see the Lord.” To refer a soul seeking for 















































. 












' := ' 






















































« 























. 



























































































































THE INCORRUPTIBLE SEED 


353 


eternal life to that which can by no possibility procure 
life, and by so doing cause it to miss the great salva¬ 
tion, is certainly murder in the worst possible form 
and sense ; and “Thou shalt not kill” and “No mur¬ 
derer hath eternal life abiding in him,” are yet the 
plainest teachings of God’s Word. That all this 
assumption of divine powers and prerogatives is the 
height of blasphemy, ought to be well understood, and 
yet this is the only consistent method by which the 
doctrine of water baptism can be maintained. The 
one has just as much authority in Scripture as the 
other. For a person to assume divine power and 
prerogatives is certainly no more blasphemous than is 
the doctrine that spiritual heart change may be 
wrought through earthly elements or ordinances. The 
one is as impossible as the other. 

There may have been some excuse for such gross 
misconception in the past, and during wdiat is known 
as the “dark ages”; but what is to be said of those 
who under the enlightening power of the gospel have 
been brought to see and to acknowledge the error of 
such a conception, yet who continue the deception by 
giving countenance to the perpetuation of these things, 
while at the same time knowing full well that the 
religion of Jesus Christ and the truth and character 
of God are thereby being blasphemed, and men are 
being lured to put their trust therein for salvation, and 
thus make shipwreck of their faith and are lost ? 


23 























































































* 





















































PART V 

THE TESTIMONY OF REVELATION 


355 




- 


* 

• 
























* 

. 


























































' 











- 





. 




























































PART V 

THE TESTIMONY OF REVELATION 

CHAPTER XXIII 

THE FOUNTAIN OF THE WATER OF LIFE 
CHRIST THE LIVING FOUNTAIN. 

Another evidence" as to the source and character 
of the water through the agency of which God’s pur¬ 
pose to make man into his image and to baptize him 
in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is to 
be accomplished, is set forth amid the awe-inspiring 
utterances of the Spirit as expressed in Revelation 
21 : 5, 6, which reads thus: “And he that sat upon 
the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And 
he said unto me, Write : for these words are true and 
faithful. And he said unto me, It is done. I am 
Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I w T ill 
give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the 
water of life freely.” It certainly will not be claimed 
that the water here spoken of is anything less than the 
mighty stream of God’s grace, which flows out to 
humanity through Jesus Christ, the fountain of all 
grace and wisdom. Yet there is nothing more in 
the language to indicate that it is supernatural than 
there is in other Scripture texts which we have quoted 
in this argument, in which water is specified as the 

357 


358 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


instrumentality through which baptism and soul purity 
are wrought out for the children of men and eternal 
life secured. 

If the water in this passage is conceded not to be of 
an earthly character, by what logic or argument can it 
be shown or held that the water elsewhere spoken of 
through which baptism and the new birth are effected, 
and upon which salvation is made to depend, is of an 
earthly character ? Are there two or more baptismal 
waters known to Scripture, one the river of water of 
life, spiritual in character, while the other or others 
are of earth—the one just as good as the other and 
equally potent in the regeneration of the human soul? 
Could any conception or statement be more properly 
denominated a doctrine of devils than this ? 


CHAPTER XXIV 

THE ALPHA AND OMEGA OF INSPIRATION 

We now come to the closing words of inspiration, 
the very last utterance of God to man. We find that 
even as the “tree of lifeand the “river of water of 
life” were the earliest subjects of inspiration and the 
most central phenomena of the environment of man 
in the first instance, so also inspiration brushes aside 
the mystic curtain of the ages, and stepping within 
the veil, discloses to human perception the present 
and future environment of man, the central phenom¬ 
enon of which is thus described : “And he showed 
me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, 
proceeding out of the throne of God and of the 
Lamb. . . . And he saith unto me, Seal not the 
sayings of the prophecy of this book; for the time is 
at hand. He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: 
and he which is filthy [unbaptized], let him be filthy 
still. . . . Behold, I come quickly ; and my reward is 
with me, to give every man according as his work 
shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and 
the end, the first and the last. Blessed are they that 
do his commandments, that they may have right to 
the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates 
into the city. ... I Jesus have sent mine angel to 
testify unto you these things in the churches. I am 
the root and the offspring of David, and the bright 

359 


360 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


and morning star. And the Spirit and the bride say. 
Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let 
him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him 
take the water of life freely. For I testify unto every 
man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this 
book, If any man shall add unto these things, God 
shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this 
book : and if any man shall take away from the words 
of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his 
part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, 
and from the things which are written in this book” 
(Rev. 22: 1-19). 

In this discussion we have examined many passages 
of Scripture bearing upon this subject which reveal 
with unerring certainty the great and overshadowing 
importance of “the water” to the successful prosecu¬ 
tion of God’s purpose to baptize the children of men 
into the likeness of himself. But the fact that this 
last utterance of the Spirit unto the churches is but 
a renewed effort upon the part of inspiration, ere the 
sacred page is closed and sealed forever, to draw the 
attention of humanity thereto, and once again to seek 
to impress this matter upon the hearts and consciences 
of the people in such manner that the tremendous 
significance inhering therein may be apprehended, 
adds peculiar strength to the argument going to prove 
its absolute essentiality. That this “river of water 
of life,” which is in this last utterance of Scripture 
once again forced upon our attention, is the same 
gushing spring, the same flowing fountain, the same 
swelling stream, to which the Holy Ghost is ever seek¬ 
ing to direct attention all through the biblical record 


THE ALPHA AND OMEGA OF INSPIRATION 361 

of God’s dealings with humanity, is manifest, and can¬ 
not truthfully be denied. It was in view of this 
stream, as in contradistinction to the scarcity which 
obtained under the Old Testament dispensation, that, 
inspiration declares, “ I will pour water upon him that 
is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground.” It was 
for this that the Psalmist longed “ in a dry and thirsty 
land, where no water is.” It was in this that his soul 
sought cleansing from his iniquities and “ secret faults ”' 
when he said, crying unto God, “ Create in me a clean 
heart, 0 God; and renew a right spirit within me” ; 
also when he said, “Wash [baptize] me, and I shall 
be whiter than snow.” The prophet had this cleans¬ 
ing stream in view when he said, “Wash you, make 
you clean; put away the evil,” etc. It was certainly 
this which he had in mind when he said, speaking for 
God, “I will extend peace to her like a river, and the 
glory of the Gentiles like a flowing stream”; and 
when it is said, “ There is a river, the streams whereof 
shall make glad the city of God.” . 

It was this same to which inspiration refers, saying, 
“When the poor and needy seek water, and there is 
none, and their tongue faileth for thirst, I the Lord 
will hear them, I the God of Israel will not forsake 
them. I will open rivers in high places, and fountains 
in the midst of the valleys: I will make the wilder¬ 
ness a pool of water, and the dry land springs of 
water.” It was this same living water that was to sup¬ 
ply the “fountain” which was to be “opened to the 
house of David.” It was the same which the prophet 
saw breaking out in the wilderness like rivers, and as 
streams in the desert, until the dry land became a pool 


362 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


and the thirsty land springs of water, and that to 
which he invited humanity, saying, “Ho, every one 
that thirsteth, come ye to the waters.” Another de¬ 
clares the release of the people from former conditions 
of drought thus : “ I have sent forth thy prisoners out 
of the pit wherein is no water.” It was with this liv¬ 
ing water that John the Baptist baptized the hearts of 
the people of Israel, until repentance and the remission 
of sins was accomplished in them. This was the water 
of which Nicodemus was advised by Christ that he 
must be “ born again ” ; also that which was so kindly 
urged by him upon the woman of Samaria at Jacob’s 
well, which if a man drink he shall never thirst again. 
It was the same of which he himself so abundantly 
partook when the heavens were rent asunder and the 
Holy Spirit (which he elsewhere declares is rivers of 
living water) was poured out upon him. It was this 
to which he referred when he said to his disciples, “Ye 
shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and 
with the baptism I am baptized withal shall ye be 
baptized.” He meant this also when he said, “I have 
a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I strait¬ 
ened [or, limited] till it be accomplished !” 

It was this same Divine Spirit, the water, of which 
he invited Israel to partake on that last “great day of 
the feast, . . . saying, If any man thirst, let him come 
unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the 
Scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers 
of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, 
which they that believe on him should receive.)” 
We know it to have been the Holy Ghost, the “rivers 
of living water,” to which he referred when he said to 


THE ALPHA AND OMEGA OF INSPIRATION 363 

his disciples, “Ye shall be baptized with the Holy 
Ghost not many days hence.” It was of this that 
the three thousand drank, and with which they were 
all baptized according to the saying of Peter, “Repent, 
and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus 
Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive 
the gift of the Holy Ghost,” the water. It was this 
water which the Samaritans received at the hands of 
Peter and John when it is said, “Then laid they their 
hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.” 
It was this mighty “river of water of life” that 
overwhelmed both the eunuch and Saul of Tarsus 
when they were baptized with the Holy Ghost. Cor¬ 
nelius and his family also, as we have seen, were not 
forbidden “the water,” and were hence said to be bap¬ 
tized, inasmuch as the “ Holy Ghost fell on all them 
which heard the word.” 

In this same cleansing stream and healing fount, 
Lydia, the Philippian jailor, Crispus, Gaius, and the 
household of Stephanas, together with the twelve men 
of Ephesus, were all baptized, not only to the extent 
of “repentance for the remission of sins,” but unto 
“regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost”; and 
not only these, but the long line of Scripture worthies 
of whom particular mention is impossible, who all 
sought cleansing in this mighty stream of God’s grace, 
and were all thus made partakers of the Holy Ghost, 
and hence were “born again, not of corruptible seed, 
but of incorruptible, by the word of God [Jesus 
Christ], which liveth and abideth forever,” in whose 
name they found the right to “enter in through the 
gates into the city,” to “go no more out,” but to be led 


364 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


through “green pastures” and “beside the still waters,” 
and with joy to “draw water out of the wells of sal¬ 
vation” forever. Happy consummation, glorious end¬ 
ing ! the praise of which belongeth only unto God. 

CHRIST THE ONLY PERFECT FOUNTAIN. 

The foregoing passages, with many others which 
might be quoted, including this last exhortation of the 
Spirit unto the churches, not only reveal the absolute 
necessity of “the water” to the successful carrying out 
of the expressed purpose of God to baptize mankind 
into the image of God, or “in [into] the name of the 
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” but 
they also reveal the fact that such purpose could never 
have been brought about or accomplished through the 
agencies prevailing under the old dispensation. That 
the forms, ceremonies, and ordinances of the old 
law, together with all the other agencies employed, 
were wholly inadequate as “vehicles of grace” or as 
means by which the water of life could be adminis¬ 
tered to all of earth’s teeming millions, is clearly 
manifest. Indeed, as we have seen and as Paul de¬ 
clares, these were weak and unprofitable, and for this 
reason (mark the expression) were taken “out of the 
way” in order to make room for a “more excellent 
way,” in and through which the salvation of the race 
might be effected. Even the living witnesses, “holy 
men of God,” who “spake as they were moved by the 
Holy Ghost,” were altogether inadequate to the task of 
furnishing a fitting medium through which the river 
of the water of life might flow in sufficient volume to 
accomplish the baptism of the nations. 


THE ALPHA AND OMEGA OF INSPIKATION 365 

Even John the Baptist, who, the Master declared, was 
“more than a prophet,” even this mighty messenger 
of God, the forerunner of the Messiah, who was said 
to be “full of the Holy Ghost,” the water, was forced 
to admit his inability, while at the same time declaring 
his baptism to be a true baptism to the extent that it 
operated (namely, unto repentance), and accomplished 
through the only agency of true baptism, namely, “the 
w r ater” (“I indeed baptize you with water unto [or 
to the extent of, or as far as] repentance,” etc.). 
Although John was thus compelled to admit his own 
inability to perform the'“perfect work,” because of his 
limitations, notwithstanding none “born of women” 
was “greater than he,” he yet, in the same breath 
in which he acknowledged this, declared that one 
was coming, yea, was even then among them, the 
latchet of whose shoes he was not worthy to stoop 
down and unloose. “He shall baptize you with the 
Holy Ghost [the water], and with fire : whose fan is 
in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge [or, 
baptize] his floor, and gather his wheat into the 
garner,” that is, make a complete ending of the work, 
as in contradistinction to the partial purification per¬ 
formed by John, designated as the “baptism of repent¬ 
ance.” Even Christ, while in the flesh, seems to have 
been limited by his physical environment. Not until 
after his divesture was the Holy Spirit able to flow 
unrestricted to the full accomplishment of the work 
of baptism. 

But these passages not only reveal the great need of 
man in the olden time, and the absolute necessity 
of the water to baptism into Christlikeness, together 


366 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


with the insufficiency of the supply and the inadequacy 
of the agencies through which the life-giving stream 
of God’s grace was compelled to force itself under the 
old dispensation, but, looking forward with glad pro¬ 
phetic vision, they describe a coming better time, when 
gushing “spring” and flowing “fountain” and mighty 
“river” should mark the dawning of a better day, a 
new and glorious epoch, when the mighty stream of 
God’s grace should find an ampler fountain and & more 
adequate channel through which its life-giving tide 
might flow out to the baptism of the children of men. 

Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Samuel and 
the prophets, and John the Baptist had all been used 
of God as “vehicles of grace,” whereby the world 
might be supplied with the fullness of the measure of 
the riches of the kingdom, yet to but few indeed was 
the water supplied in such quantities as to insure life 
and fruitage. Not until He came in whom dwelleth 
“all the fullness of God,” “the only begotten of the 
Father, full of grace and truth,” did the water of life 
find its way to this sin-cursed earth in sufficient volume 
so that all might find free and full supply, in which 
their sins might be washed away and they find a place 
among those who are sanctified through “the wash¬ 
ing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; 
which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ 
our Saviour.” 


CHAPTER XXV 

LET HIM COME 

It cannot be supposed that, after haying opened up 
this new and living way through the Son of his love, 
and erected this “fountain opened to the house of 
David/’ “in the midst of the valleys,” through which 
alone his mighty purpose to baptize the children of 
men into his image couM by any possibility be effected, 
God’s interest therein should cease, and he there¬ 
after be indifferent as to what attitude man might 
take towards this matter. On the contrary, every con¬ 
sideration compels his continued thought and most 
zealous care. Hence it is that we find that, in addi¬ 
tion to all of the other passages of his Word wherein 
this matter is spoken of and emphasized and insisted 
upon, this last utterance of the Spirit unto the churches 
also expresses the great concern which he still has 
upon this subject. 

In this last word to man not only is attention called 
to the fountain, and to the abundance of the water, 
and to the free and full invitation to all to come and 
take thereof, but, mindful of the fact that the salvation 
of the human soul could only be prevented by frus¬ 
trating the grace of God and forbidding the water, so 
that its cleansing, life-giving stream should be hindered 
from reaching the hearts and souls of men, and thus 
they be caused to remain in the sinful or unbaptized 

367 


368 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


state into which the act of the garden had brought 
them, he issues his fiat, backed by the statement that 
his eternal anathema would rest upon any person who 
by adding to or taking from his word should “ frus¬ 
trate the grace of God” and “forbid the water” to 
earth’s teeming millions so that his gracious purpose 
to baptize the nations should be thwarted or in any 
way hindered. This is all set forth in the command, 
“ Whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely. 
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of 
the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto 
these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that 
are written in this book : and if any man shall take 
away from the words of the book of this prophecy, 
God shall take away his part out of the book of life, 
and out of the holy city, and. from the things which 
are written in this book.” 

THE ANATHEMA OF GOD. 

It is here made very plain and distinct that the 
anathema of God will be pronounced against any per¬ 
son or persons who by adding to or taking away from 
God’s truth frustrate the grace of God, or prevent any 
person from discovering or coming and taking “the 
water of life freely.” 

As we inquire into this matter to ascertain who or 
what class of persons offend in these two particulars, 
we discover that the sin of taking away from God’s 
truth, and hence that of sealing up the fountain of 
life, and thus bringing upon themselves the withering 
curse of God as set forth in this passage, is the peculiar 
sin of the skeptic, the infidel, the atheist, and all the 


LET HIM COME 


369 


large class of those who deny, repudiate, or denounce 
the true word of God as set forth in the divine revela¬ 
tion of his will to men. These “add” nothing to the 
truth of God, but the rather “take away” therefrom. 
It is impossible to add to that which we repudiate and 
deny as a premise or foundation. 

This brings us face to face with the startling propo¬ 
sition that whatever additions have been made to God’s 
holy word of truth and whatever anathemas have 
been merited therefor must not be chargeable to skep¬ 
ticism, infidelity, atheism, or to any form of unbelief 
or repudiation of the truths*bf revelation which would 
constitute the fulfillment of the expression, “take away 
from,” as specified in this last warning of the Spirit as 
given in this passage ; but reason affirms, and experi¬ 
ence also most abundantly declares, that the additions 
to the word of God, whether in the past or present, 
have always been made by those who held themselves 
as especial guardians of the faith, and who arrogated 
to themselves the power and authority to determine 
who may and who may not “come” and “take the 
water of life,” not “freely” as commanded by God, but 
by subscription to such conditions as these self- 
constituted custodians of the grace of God have seen 
fit in their wisdom (blasphemous ignorance) to impose. 

THE SIN AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST. 

This blasphemous assumption of divine prerogatives 
whereby God’s truth has been distorted and made to 
express a lie, by reason of which the free flow of the 
“river of water of life” has been prevented and the 
“fountain” sealed and the “water” forbidden, and in 

24 


370 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


consequence of which millions have been made to 
perish for lack of the “water” almost within sight and 
hearing of home, is as truly the sin against the Holy 
Ghost, which the Master says “ hath never forgiveness,” 
as is the sin of those who deny, repudiate, and con¬ 
demn both the Scriptures and their author, and who 
“take away from” God’s holy truth ; for surely, if 
there is an action upon the part of man, or possible 
for him to commit, which may be properly designated 
the sin against the Holy Ghost, this shutting up the 
kingdom of heaven against men, whether by adding 
to or taking away from the free and full invitation of 
God and this command to let all, “whosoever will,” 
come and “take the water of life freely,” is that sin. 

It was hence that the scribes and Pharisees were 
denominated by Christ hypocrites, to whom he turned 
in fierce anger, heaping upon them his mightiest 
anathemas, saying : “Woe unto you, scribes and Phari¬ 
sees, hypocrites! for [now mark] ye shut up the 
kingdom of heaven against men : for ye neither go in 
yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to 
go in. . . . Woe unto you, ... for ye compass sea and 
land to make one proselyte. ... Woe unto you, . . . 
for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and 
have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, 
mercy, and faith. ... Ye blind guides, which strain 
at a gnat, and swallow a camel. Woe unto you, . . . 
for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the 
platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. 
Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse [baptize] first that which 
is within, . . . that [or, as the only means by which] 
the outside . . . may be clean also. Woe unto you. 


LET HIM COME 


371 


. . . for ye are like unto whited sepulchers, which 
indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full 
of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.” 

A MOMENTOUS QUESTION. 

This brings us to inquire whether or not under the 
new dispensation God’s truth has been added to 
under the rule and reign of those who have arrogated 
to themselves the especial prerogative of representing 
the church of Jesus Christ in the world, and w T ho claim 
apostolic succession and the historic episcopate. 

The heart grows Taint, and the soul is made to 
stagger, as we are here brought face to face with the 
truth that never, even under the rule of the scribes 
and Pharisees, did the Judaistic church reach so high 
in its blasphemous assumption of divine prerogatives 
and unholy usurpation of the power and attributes 
belonging only unto God, as the history of a corrupt 
and apostate Gentile church discloses. When we 
consider these things and understand that God has 
been made a liar, and his word set at naught, and all 
the infinite provisions of his love and grace counted 
as altogether insufficient; that his plan has been 
added to, and enlarged upon, and almost super¬ 
seded by the introduction and perpetuation of these 
old idolatrous customs and practices common to the 
worship of the false gods of heathenism, which by 
priestly dictum are set forth and enforced as being 
necessary to salvation and as constituting baptism and 
the new birth ; and that those who refuse to subscribe 
to these “damnable heresies” and “doctrines of devils” 
are by the same priestly authority excommunicated 


372 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


from the church and from the gospel ministry,—when, 
I say, we see that all this is true, it requires no divine 
wisdom to predict the result. Even human judgment 
can foretell the terrible disaster that must inevitably 
attend such a course. The curse of God, so clearly 
foretold, cannot fail to be pronounced upon those who 
are guilty in this particular. 

I maintain that the devil never found in Judaism 
more ready service in his satanic efforts to dam up the 
“ river of water of life ” and to hedge up the way to the 
“fountain” and to forbid the water to the famishing 
children of earth by adding to God’s word, by bind¬ 
ing burdens grievous to be borne, and by setting up 
false issues and false tests, than he has found under 
the hierarchical rule of priest, bishop, prelate, or pope, 
whether of the Abyssinian, Greek, Roman, Anglican, 
or any other order who arrogate to themselves divine 
authority and the right to exercise censorship over 
the church of Jesus Christ, and lord it “over God’s 
heritage.” 

In view of these things, can it be thought a thing 
possible with him who has declared himself to be a 
“jealous God” and “no respecter of persons” that he 
will look with complacency or indifference upon the 
modern attempt to frustrate the grace of God by cover¬ 
ing up the stream of the water of life with this super¬ 
abundance of error, which has been added until, as in 
the olden time, the kingdom of heaven has been “shut 
up” against men, when for like action he “spared not 
the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell ” ; 
brought in “ the flood upon the world of the ungodly ” ; 
turned the “cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into 


LET HIM COME 


373 


ashes”; slew “Korah, Dathan, and Abiram,” and 
caused the names of “Balaam the son of Beor” and 
“Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin,” 
to be held in everlasting contempt; and pronounced 
his woe upon the scribes and Pharisees for shutting up 
the kingdom of heaven, so that those who would have 
entered in were not permitted to do so? Think you, I 
repeat, will such a God excuse the action of those who, 
in these days, perform a like action and are guilty of 
like sin? “I tell you, Nay : but, except ye repent, ye 
shall all likewise perish.” 

It is written, “He that despised Moses’ law died 
without mercy under two or three witnesses: of how 
much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be 
thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son 
of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, 
wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and 
hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?” For 
such, the apostle declares, “there remaineth no more 
sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of 
judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour 
the adversaries.” 


FALSE DOCTRINES. 

•Paul, in writing to the Galatians with reference to 
the wondrous effort that was being made to turn them 
from the simplicity of the gospel by the introduction 
of rites, ceremonies, and ordinances, and warning them 
against these things, declares, “ I marvel that ye are so 
soon removed from him that called you into the grace 
of Christ unto another gospel: which is not another; 
but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert 


374 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


the gospel of Christ [which is the same as to “forbid 
the water”]. But though we, or an angel from heaven, 
preach any other gospel unto you than that which we 
have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” Passing 
on, he declares the character and origin of the gospel 
which was preached to him and which he preached, 
giving an account of how in Jerusalem he set himself 
against the false teachers who were endeavoring to 
destroy the “liberty” which they had in Christ, “to 
whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an 
hour; that [now mark the reason] the truth of the 
gospel might continue with you.” There we have the 
reason why Paul opposed the introduction and perpetu¬ 
ation of these things. He well knew that even as the 
ceremonial law and its observance had filled the mind 
and heart of the Jewish church, so would its introduc¬ 
tion into the Gentile church drive out the true worship 
of God. He, therefore, with all his might opposed 
himself to its introduction, “that the truth of the gos¬ 
pel might continue.” The fact that Paul’s action in 
this matter did not prejudice Peter, James, and John 
against him, but that they, perceiving the grace of God 
that was given unto him, extended to him and Bar¬ 
nabas the right hand of fellowship, speaks volumes 
as to their attitude touching this matter. 

It will be remembered that Paul is here referring to 
that celebrated council at Jerusalem of which we have 
elsewhere spoken, in which all the disciples concurred 
in their opposition to the binding of the ceremonial 
law upon the Gentile church, and united in writing 
letters to the churches, in which said law was fully 
abrogated. Paul reiterates his former declaration, 


LET HIM COME 375 

stating that any person who taught the contrary 
should “bear his judgment, whosoever he be.” 

But not only do the utterances and writings of Paul 
bear evidence to the widespread error which had crept 
into the church of that day, but Peter also sets forth 
the same fact, especially in his second epistle to the 
churches. II. Peter 2:1: “But there were false proph¬ 
ets also among the people, even as there shall be false 
teachers among you, who privily shall bring in dam¬ 
nable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought 
them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. 
And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by 
reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken 
of,” etc. Jude also, who lived after the time of the 
apostles, repeats these utterances of Peter and declares 
their fulfillment in his day. He says : “ Beloved, . . . 
it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort 
you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith 
which was once delivered unto the saints. For there 
are certain men crept in unawares, . . . ungodly men, 
turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and 
denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. 
. . . Woe unto them ! for they have gone in the way 
of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam 
for a reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core. 
These are spots in your feasts of charity, . . . clouds 
they are without water, . . . sensual, having not the 
Spirit,” etc. 

In addition to these is that graphic description of 
the seven churches of Asia and their spiritual condi¬ 
tion, as given in the first chapters of Revelation. 
These all prove the wondrous struggle which racked 


876 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


and tore the apostolic church, as well as that of subse¬ 
quent years, in which “damnable heresies” and “doc¬ 
trines of devils ” were sought to be and were introduced 
by false teachers, who came in “ sheep’s clothing,” but in¬ 
wardly were “ravening wolves,” “not sparing the flock.” 
Who, in the face of these Scripture utterances, to say 
nothing of other sources of information, can assert the 
impossibility of foisting any error upon the church of 
that day? Who, indeed, is capable of saying that 
water baptism was not one of these “damnable 
heresies” and “doctrines of devils” which were being 
championed by some who had “crept in,” and who are 
declared to be “ungodly men,” “seducing spirits”? 

If errors worthy of being thus designated had got¬ 
ten a foothold in the early church, who is capable of 
saying that an error even of the gigantic proportions 
of water baptism may not have been successfully 
introduced or perpetuated? We have already seen 
(and no person of intelligence and honesty will dis¬ 
pute the fact) that water baptism was and is a heathen, 
idolatrous practice and religious rite, performed in 
honor of their gods, whether in their idol temples and 
in the presence of the idols or elsewhere. Now, Paul 
specifically declares that “the things which the Gen¬ 
tiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God : 
and I would not that ye should have fellowship with 
devils.” It must be evident that this remark covers 
every idolatrous custom or practice. Water baptism, 
therefore, being an idolatrous religious rite, must of 
necessity bring the persons participating therein into 
the attitude of idolatrous worshipers, and hence, accord¬ 
ing to Paul, having “ fellowship with devilfe.” 


LET HIM COME 


377 


This brings us to the close of the argument. We 
have seen man’s great need of cleansing. We have 
also seen God’s purpose to baptize man into the image 
of himself. We have discovered the insufficiency of 
the water supply and the inadequacy of the agencies 
through which it must needs flow in the olden time. 
We have seen these taken out of the way, and a large, 
yea, a sufficient “fountain” opened, to which all are 
invited to come and “let” come. Yea, we have beheld 
the “pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, pro¬ 
ceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb,” 
sufficient for all human need. We have read the 
anathema of God against any who would prevent its 
flow or forbid any person to come to its life-giving 
stream. We have seen that the great need of the- 
church is not more censorship of the gospel, not more 
arrogating to itself of divine authority, not more forms, 
ceremonies, and ordinances (8ta<p6pm$ fan tht/io??), but 
more of the one true baptism of the Holy Ghost, 
more of the grace of God, more of the “water of life,” 
more of the Christ. We have discovered that “the 
Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; 
neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear,” but that 
it is the dreadful sin of idolatry that has “separated” 
between the church and God. 

Then let the church unhand the gospel; let the 
dams be broken ; let the fountain be unsealed ; let the 
water flow ; let the grace of God be administered ; let 
heathen rites, customs, and ordinances cease from God’s 
house; let this water-god of the heathen no longer 
usurp the office and functions of the Holy Spirit of 
God ; let the idol be broken, yea, let it be burned with 


378 


CHRISTIAN BAPTISM 


the fire of the righteous judgment of God. Thus, and 
thus only, can the church be purged from this awful 
idolatry which has so filled the land with the anathema 
of God, and this crime of the centuries be atoned for. 
Thus alone can the invitation of the “Spirit and the 
bride” be responded to in such way that the holy and 
righteous purpose of God to make man into his image 
and to baptize the nations shall have full realization. 



















> 


1 

' 

•' ' 


* 














. 



















































































































* 

































































































